Cornelius v. Jagger
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-03405
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
Cornelius v. Jagger: Judge Swain dismissed Cornelius’s complaint for lack of jurisdiction and frivolousness.
Jaquana Cornelius’s complaint was dismissed, and she was denied leave to amend and fee-free status for an appeal. Mick Jagger was the defendant.
What happened
In Cornelius v. Jagger, Jaquana Cornelius sued Mick Jagger, alleging that he kept $24,000, abused her, and caused other harms. She sought $2.2 million and a restraining order.
The court found that Cornelius did not show that her claims met the $75,000 minimum required for diversity jurisdiction, and she did not state a federal-law claim. The court also found that her allegations had no plausible basis in law or fact.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and as frivolous, denied leave to amend, and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Cornelius v. Jagger · No. 1:22-cv-03405
- Laura Swain
- July 18, 2022
Background
Jaquana Cornelius proceeded without a lawyer and was allowed to file without paying court fees. She sued Mick Jagger, also identified in the caption as Sir Michael Philip Jagger, invoking diversity jurisdiction. Cornelius alleged that she transferred approximately $24,000 to Jagger to buy and decorate a home in Illinois, that he refused to return the money after their relationship ended, and that he and others emotionally and mentally abused or harassed her. She sought $2.2 million in damages and a restraining order.
Jurisdiction
The court explained that diversity jurisdiction requires citizens of different states or countries and a legally plausible amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. Although the court said the allegations appeared to show diversity between Cornelius and Jagger, it found that Cornelius had not plausibly alleged damages exceeding the $24,000 she said she transferred. The court also noted that the complaint did not assert a federal-law claim. It therefore concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear the case.
Frivolousness
The court separately found that the complaint had no arguable basis in law or fact under the statute governing fee-free cases. It concluded that the allegations about Jagger’s conduct, including withholding money until Cornelius had a baby and using other celebrities to antagonize her, did not provide plausible factual support for a legal claim and appeared irrational. The court therefore also dismissed the complaint as frivolous.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) and as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It denied leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by amendment, and terminated all other pending matters. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Cornelius permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The order does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.