Stephenson Johnson v. Milwaukee County Sheriffs et al

Filing 21

ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 10/20/2017 DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (cc: all counsel, via mail to Grace C. Stephenson Johnson )(jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
GRACE C. STEPHENSON
JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 17-CV-942-JPS

v.
CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF
WISCONSIN,

ORDER

Defendant.
This case has had a tortuous procedural history that has been
described in several prior orders. Because the case has finally come to the
point of dismissal, the Court will recite that history again in detail.
Plaintiff, Grace C. Stephenson Johnson, filed this action on July 11,
2017 against Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee County Sheriffs,
and Milwaukee County Police. (Docket #1). The Court explained at the
outset that she cannot proceed in this federal action against the hospital or
any of its staff, as they are not state actors and the exercise of federal
jurisdiction is otherwise inappropriate. (Docket #4 at 4–5). She nevertheless
filed an amended complaint in which she attempted to revive her claims
against the hospital. (Docket #7). The Court noted that the amended
complaint did not cure any of the fatal jurisdictional defects it identified,
and it therefore struck the complaint and permitted Plaintiff to continue
pursuing her claims against law enforcement. (Docket #9 at 2–3).
She persisted, however, and filed yet another amended complaint,
this time naming only the hospital and its staff. (Docket #10). This Court
again informed her that claims against those defendants would have to be

pursued, if at all, in state court. (Docket #15 at 2–3). The Court ordered her
to notify it whether she wanted to proceed on her claims against the law
enforcement officers. Id. The Court further warned her that if she elected to
proceed against the hospital, her case would be dismissed. Id. at 3.
She responded that she wished to proceed against the officers,
(Docket #18), and so the Court struck her latest attempt at amending her
complaint and directed service to proceed against the law enforcement
Defendants, (Docket #19). The Court observed as well that “Plaintiff
appears to still harbor some anger toward the hospital and its staff, but she
is reminded that the hospital is not a party to this case, it cannot become
one, and the Court will not entertain any future attempt to drag the hospital
back into this litigation.” Id. at 1.
Despite an unending series of clear instructions and second chances,
Plaintiff has now filed yet another amended complaint asserting claims
only against the hospital. (Docket #20). In the complaint, she does not even
attempt to identify a federal claim or other basis for federal jurisdiction. Id.
at 1–3. She simply asks the Court to “investigate” alleged misconduct by
hospital employees who she says treated her unkindly. Id. at 3.
But a failure of professionalism does not give rise to a federal case,
and so the Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over whatever sort of
claim Plaintiff is attempting to make. Having again chosen to pursue claims
over which this Court has no jurisdiction, the Court is forced to conclude
that Plaintiff will not reform her approach as the Court has urged. All that
remains is to follow through on its earlier warning and dismiss this case
without leave to amend. Civ. L. R. 41(c); Fischer v. Cingular Wireless, LLC,
446 F.3d 663, 665 (7th Cir. 2006).

Page 2 of 3

Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that this action be and the same is hereby
DISMISSED for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(h)(3).
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 20th day of October, 2017.
BY THE COURT:

____________________________________
J. P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge

Page 3 of 3