Absolutely no clue whatever

Here is an excerpt of what calls a "Motion to Dismiss"...(the Motion to
Dismiss, I guess):

Kathleen M. Dickson, and
on behalf of Lara E. Dickson,
Diane M. Dickson, David D. Dickson, et al,
and on behalf of all Families and
Children of the State of Connecticut
In the cause of a class action:
v. STATE OF CONNECTICUT
COMPLAINT
CA 05- 328 Torres
US DISTRICT COURT
1 Exchange Terrace
Providence, Rhode Island 02903
19 November 2005

MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS


"Defendant has motioned to dismiss complaint, when the judge has not
ruled on the appointment
of counsel..."

Now, compare that to this order, dated October 19, 2005:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
KATHLEEN M. DICKSON, and
on behalf of Lara E. Dickson
Diane M. Dickson, David D.
Dickson, et al., and on behalf :
of all Families and Children
of the State of Connecticut,
Plaintiffs,
STATE OF CONNECTICUT,
Defendant.

ORDER
DENYING MOTION
FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Before the court is the motion of Plaintiff Kathleen M.
Dickson ("Plaintiff") for the appointment of counsel. See
Amended Complaint and Motion ("Motion") at 1. Plaintiff seeks to
have counsel appointed in what she alleges is a "class action
against the State of Connecticut . . . . " - Id. The Motion is DENIED
because this court lacks juri~diction.~ The claims alleged in
the action have no connection to the District of Rhode Island.
So ordered.

BY ORDER:

DAVID L. MARTIN

United States Magistrate Judge

October 19, 2005

Although Plaintiff states that "due to the total corruption in
the State of Connecticut . . . this complaint must be prosecuted from
another jurisdiction ...," Amended Complaint and Motion at 15-16,
Plaintiff cites no statute or other authority which would allow this
court to exercise jurisdiction. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
8(a) (requiring that a complaint contain "a short and plain statement
of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends"). The
court is unaware of any grounds which would give it jurisdiction in
this matter".


Hell, she apparently doesn't even know what is going on in her own
case.

What the Court is saying is that it does NOT have authority to appoint
counsel because it doesn't have JURISDICTION.

It lacks the legal capacity to order even appointment of counsel.

.

Loading