Pagels v. Cole et al

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 6/24/2014 Denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; and Dismissing without prejudice the complaint and this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (cc: all counsel, via US Mail to Plaintiff) (nts)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ERNEST J. PAGELS, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 14-C-0683

LINDA COLE, et al.,
Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER
Ernest Pagels, Jr., proceeding pro se, has filed an action against Linda Cole and
others affiliated with an entity identified as Lutheran Social Services. Plaintiff states in the
complaint that he is bringing a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act for failure to
accommodate his disability. However, the facts alleged in the complaint do not in any way
support such a claim. Plaintiff alleges that Linda Cole “keeps beating [him] over the head
with her bible,”1 that Cole hates plaintiff’s religious beliefs and his loud and obnoxious
behavior, and that Cole allows other people to harass plaintiff but will not let plaintiff harass
others. At best, these allegations show that plaintiff is dissatisfied with whatever services
he is receiving from Cole and Lutheran Social Services, not that the defendants are
refusing to accommodate whatever disability the plaintiff may have. Thus, although plaintiff
purports to be pursuing a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act, it is clear that this
claim is “wholly insubstantial and frivolous,” and that therefore this court does not have
subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682–83 (1946); Greater

1

Given the context of the allegation, it appears plaintiff means this figuratively and
is not alleging that Cole has committed battery.

Chicago Combine and Center, Inc. v. City of Chicago, 431 F.3d 1065, 1069 (7th Cir. 2005).
The complaint will be dismissed.
I have considered whether to grant plaintiff leave to amend his complaint and
conclude that doing so would be futile. In light of the present allegations of the complaint,
it is clear that plaintiff does not have a non-frivolous claim for violations of the Americans
with Disabilities Act to pursue. Accordingly, I will dismiss this action in its entirety. Because
the dismissal is for lack of jurisdiction, it will be without prejudice.
For the reasons stated, IT IS ORDERED that the complaint and this action are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of
Court shall enter judgment.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed without
prepayment of the filing fee is DENIED.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 24th day of June, 2014.

s/ Lynn Adelman
LYNN ADELMAN
District Judge

2