Jeffress v. Titius, Civ.A. No. 90-0256(R).

• Decision Date: 26 June 1990
• Docket Number: Civ.A. No. 90-0256(R).
• Citation: 756 F. Supp. 255
• Parties: Jesse Wilson JEFFRESS, etc., Plaintiffs, v. TITIUS and Seius, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia

756 F. Supp. 255

Jesse Wilson JEFFRESS, etc., Plaintiffs, v. TITIUS and Seius, et al., Defendants.

Civ.A. No. 90-0256(R).

United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division.

June 26, 1990.

Mary Sue Terry, Atty. Gen., Roger L. Chaffe, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Czelusta, Asst. Atty. Gen., Comm. of Va., Margaret D. Moncure, and Charles F. Midkiff and Regina M. Policano, Midkiff & Hiner, P.C., Richmond, Va., for defendants.

Jesse Wilson Jeffress, pro se.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

TURK, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff, on behalf of Moses Nursing Home, Incorporated, and Moses Life Insurance Association, filed a complaint, alleging violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1. As defendants, plaintiff has named certain unnamed officials of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Edwin Baker, and Gordon Ragland. Defendants, through counsel, have filed motions to dismiss, asserting that this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this action and alleging insufficiency of service of process. The issues have been briefed, the Court has heard oral argument, and the matter is ripe for the Court's consideration.

Plaintiff alleges that defendants have caused business injury to Moses Nursing Home. The Court is of the opinion that it has no subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim. Plaintiff argues that the Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because he alleges that defendants have violated 15 U.S.C. § 1. However, the Court finds that plaintiff's claim does not state a cause of action under 15 U.S.C. § 1. To state a claim under the antitrust laws of the United States, the conduct complained of must be in interstate commerce or substantially affect interstate commerce. McLain v. Real Estate Board of New Orleans, Inc., 444 U.S. 232, 100 S.Ct. 502, 62 L.Ed.2d 441 (1980). Moreover, jurisdiction may not be invoked under the statute unless the relevant aspect of interstate commerce is identified. It is not sufficient merely to rely on identification of a relevant local activity and to presume an interrelationship with some unidentified aspect of interstate commerce. To establish jurisdiction, a plaintiff must allege the critical relationship in the pleadings. Id. at 242, 100 S.Ct. at 509. Moses Nursing Home operates an adult home in Charlotte County. Plaintiff's complaint contains no allegations as to how the alleged actions by defendants, even if they in fact injured the nursing home, affected interstate commerce in any way. Hence, plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1. Accordingly, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's complaint.

The Court is further of the opinion that plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed for insufficiency of service of process. Rule 4(d), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requires that each defendant be served with a copy of the complaint and a summons, together. The Titius and Seius named in the style of plaintiff's complaint apparently refer to unnamed officials of the Commonwealth of Virginia. As these officials are unnamed, they have not been served with process. Plaintiff has apparently attempted to complete service by serving the Attorney General of Virginia. However, this official is not empowered to accept service of process on behalf of...