BANKS
v.
SHENANDOAH GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

M.D. Fla. | 2019-11-04
No. 2:19-cv-754
District Court, M.D. Florida (2019)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The Court dismissed the case without prejudice because it was filed in the wrong district court. The case properly belongs in the Southern District of Florida.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a complaint in the Middle District of Florida purporting to enforce a maritime lien. The complaint indicated an intent to file in the …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Sovereign Citizen Movement Maritime Lien Venue

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sovereign Citizen Movement cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

This matter is before the Court sua sponte on Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. #1). Plaintiff has filed what purports to be an in rem suit to enforce a maritime lien as to property located within the Southern District of Florida. Furthermore, the onepage complaint reflects an intent to file in the “United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.” Upon due consideration, the Court finds that this case properly belongs, if anywhere, in the Southern District of Florida rather than the Middle District of Florida. Therefore, the Court dismisses the complaint without prejudice to any right that Plaintiff may have to refile his claim(s) in the Southern District of Florida, if he may do so in good faith.1

a A #3

—,| i ; a

TOM BARBER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

(citing Roach v. Arrist, No. 8:15-cv-2547-T-33AEP, 2016 WL 8943290, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 7, 2016)).

Footnotes
1 Upon review of the complaint and exhibits, it appears that Plaintiff subscribes to what is known as the “sovereign citizen movement.” The Court warns Plaintiff that the arguments and legal theories espoused by sovereign citizens have been consistently rejected as “utterly frivolous, patently ludicrous, and a waste of . . . the court’s time, which is being paid by hard-earned tax dollars.” See Young v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 3:16cv298/RV/EMT, 2018 WL 1251920, at *2 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 12, 2018) Accordingly, it is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. # 1) is dismissed without prejudice to any right Plaintiff may have to refile his claims in the Southern District of Florida, if he may do so in good faith. 2. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and deadlines and thereafter close this case. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on this 4th day of November, 2019.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw