Soling v. Brady, et al
Case Date: 06/01/1993
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 92-2320
|
May 28, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ___________________ No. 92-2320 CHESTER P. SOLING, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. NICHOLAS F. BRADY, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. __________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Frank H. Freedman, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ___________________ Before Breyer, Chief Judge, ___________ Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges. ______________ ___________________ Chester P. Soling on brief pro se. _________________ A. John Pappalardo, United States Attorney, and Karen L. ___________________ ________ Goodwin, Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellees. _______ __________________ __________________ Per Curiam. Plaintiff Chester P. Soling appeals from a __________ district court order dismissing his complaint against former Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1 Soling's complaint alleged that the Federal Express Company refused to service him because he did not have a credit card and that he was denied the use of New York City's transit system because he did not have exact change or tokens. The complaint sought a judgment requiring the Treasury Department to honor the pledge appearing on U.S. bills (i.e. - "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"). We have carefully reviewed the record and the parties' briefs on appeal. We agree that the district court properly dismissed this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, there being no applicable waiver of sovereign immunity to support the plaintiff's complaint. See Coggeshall Development Corp. v. Diamond, 884 F.2d (1st ___ _____________________________ _______ Cir. 1989). Cf. Nemser v. New York City Transit Authority, ___ ______ ________________________________ 530 N.Y.S. 2d 493, 494 (Sup. 1988). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. ________ ____________________ 1. The complaint also named as defendants the United States Treasury Department and Treasurer Catalina Vasquez Villalpando. -2- |