Jasmina Ivankovic v. Children's Hospital of WI
Filed Nonprecedential Disposition PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Michael S. Kanne, Circuit Judge; Diane S. Sykes, Circuit Judge and David F. Hamilton, Circuit Judge. [6839201-1]  [17-1127]
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 May 4, 2017*
Decided May 5, 2017
MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF
Jasmina Ivankovic filed this pro se litigation seeking to hold Children’s Hospital
of Wisconsin, Inc. accountable for permanent injuries she sustained in a slip-and-fall
while working at the facility in 1998. She asserted subject-matter jurisdiction under the
diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, but both Ivankovic and the hospital are citizens of the
same state, Wisconsin. And common citizenship aside, she did not allege an amount in
controversy. The district court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
We have agreed to decide this case without oral argument because the briefs and
record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not
significantly aid the court. See FED R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
That decision is unassailable, prompting the hospital to argue in its brief that we
should sanction Ivankovic under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 for filing a
frivolous appeal. But that rule says a litigant seeking sanctions must request them in a
separate motion, which the hospital has not done. And, ironically, in the one opinion
cited by the hospital in support of its request for sanctions, we not only pointed out
Rule 38’s requirement of a “separately filed motion” but said we are “not inclined to
award sanctions in favor of a party that cannot be bothered to follow the rules itself.”
Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 671 F.3d 669, 671 (7th Cir. 2012). That inclination has
not changed, though we do warn Ivankovic that this reprieve will not insulate her from
sanctions if she pursues other frivolous litigation in the future.
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?