Rosie Lewis v. Joliet Police Department, et al
Filed Nonprecedential Disposition PER CURIAM. DISMISSED. Joel M. Flaum, Circuit Judge; Ilana Diamond Rovner, Circuit Judge and Ann Claire Williams, Circuit Judge. [6834089-1]  [16-3005]
To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted April 13, 2017*
Decided April 14, 2017
JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge
ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge
ROSIE TYLER LEWIS,
JOLIET POLICE DEPARTMENT and
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
No. 16 C 00025
Sharon Johnson Coleman,
O R D E R
Rosie Lewis brought this civil rights lawsuit, alleging that on April 17, 2015, she
was “arrested” without probable cause and with “excessive force” in a “conspiracy”
* We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because it would not
significantly aid the court. FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C). One of the two defendants, the
Joliet Police Department, is not a suable entity, see Sow v. Fortville Police Dep’t, 636 F.3d
293, 300 (7th Cir. 2011), and it was not served with process in the district court. Neither
defendant is participating in this appeal.
between the Joliet Police Department and Lois Barber, an acquaintance. After granting
Lewis’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, the district court ruled that the
complaint was vague, conclusory, and contradicted by an attachment. The court
therefore dismissed the complaint for failing to state a claim on which relief could be
granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It gave her three weeks to file an amended
complaint. See FED. R. CIV. P. 15(a). After Lewis did not do so, the court dismissed her
lawsuit with prejudice.
On appeal Lewis does not address the district court’s reasons for its decision.
Instead she complains about a different incident not mentioned anywhere in her filings
with the district court. She accuses the defendants and a new group of people of
“wrongfully evict[ing]” her from her Joliet Housing Authority unit on May 28, 2015.
This transformation of her case from wrongful arrest to wrongful eviction is fatal to her
appeal for two reasons. First, she may not raise a claim on appeal that she did not
present in the district court. See C & N Corp. v. Gregory Kane & Ill. River Winery, Inc., 756
F.3d 1024, 1026 (7th Cir. 2014). Second, she has not complied with Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 28(a)(8), which requires that an appellate brief contain an
argument that engages with the district court’s reasoning. Even pro se litigants must
follow this rule. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327–28 (1989); Anderson v. Hardman,
241 F.3d 544, 545–46 (7th Cir. 2001). Because she has not complied with this rule, the
appeal is DISMISSED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?