Montemurro v. Schmidt et al

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING CASE signed by Judge Rudolph T. Randa on 5/9/2014. 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED. Matter DISMISSED for Failure to State any Plausible Claim for Relief. (cc: all counsel, via US mail to Angelina Montemurro)(cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ANGELINA MONTEMURRO,
Plaintiff,
-vsCase No. 14-C-478

RICHARD O. SCHMIDT, JOOST KAP,
KIM KLUCK, MICHAEL BERNDT,
Dr. SHELDON WASSERMAN, DAVE ROSS,
Defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER
Angelina Montemurro requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis in
connection with this lawsuit. The Court is skeptical of Montemurro’s claim that she is
unable to pay the filing fee in this case. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). She owns a $300,000
home and receives $2,280 a month between unemployment and child support
payments. Not surprisingly, however, Montemurro’s mortgage payments are rather
high, and as a result, her monthly expenses outpace her monthly income. Therefore,
the Court will grant Montemurro’s motion to proceed IFP.
However, Montemurro’s complaint is seemingly frivolous, and it definitely
fails to state any plausible claims for relief. § 1915(e)(2). It is, essentially, a rather
prolix discussion pertaining to issues arising out of her employment as a doctor
working for United Hospital System.

Montemurro claims that she is a federal

informant, and that UHS retaliated against her for working to expose organized crime
in Kenosha. She then cites a lengthy series of state and federal statutes, some civil,

some criminal.

The Court cannot discern any actionable claims out of Ms.

Montemurro’s diatribe (for example, while Montemurro states that her employment
was terminated, she does not claim that she was terminated for a reason that is
prohibited under federal law). Additionally, her complaint appears to be some sort of
collateral attack upon an ongoing civil proceeding in Kenosha County Circuit Court,
Montemurro v. United Hospital System, Case No. 2012CV002530.

Obviously,

Montemurro is not entitled to relief in this Court with respect to adverse state court
rulings.

See, e.g., Lim v. Courtcall, Inc., Nos. 11-C-748, 11-C-866, 2011 WL

5825899, at *1 (E.D. Wis. Nov. 17, 2011) (a complaint should be dismissed as
frivolous if it “lacks arguable basis either in law or fact;” a frivolous claim is one that
“no reasonable person could suppose to have any merit;” a complaint should also be
dismissed if it “fails to include sufficient facts to state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face”) (citing cases).
Therefore, Montemurro’s motion for leave to proceed IFP [ECF No. 3] is
GRANTED. This matter is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter
judgment accordingly.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 9th day of May, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

__________________________
HON. RUDOLPH T. RANDA
U.S. District Judge
-2-