Keys, Louis et al v. Litscher, Jon et al

Filing 104

ORDER denying 99 plaintiff's motion for reconsideration; denying 102 plaintiff's motion to compel defendants to send the settlement check to his power of attorney. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 10/26/2020. (lam),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
LOUIS KEYS,
Plaintiff,

OPINION AND ORDER

v.
18-cv-303-wmc
GABRIEL CHINIAS, LINDSAY WALKER,
OFFICER RAMSDEN, NURSE GIBBONS,
and SGT. EBBERT,
Defendants.
Pro se plaintiff Louis Keys filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against employees of
Columbia Correctional Institution. On September 17, 2020, the parties stipulated to
dismiss this case with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), and the court closed it
the next day. (Dkt. ##91, 92.) Since then, Keys has filed three motions and a letter
seeking to compel defendants to send his settlement check to his power of attorney as
opposed to his institution or a lawyer.1 (Dkt. ##95, 99, 102, 103.) The court denied
Keys’ first motion in a text-only order. (Dkt. #98.) For the following reasons, the court
will also deny Keys’ (1) motion for reconsideration of that order and (2) renewed motion
to compel.
The court will not wade into this dispute because, as defendants note, the court
lacks the authority to resolve it. There is no diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Moreover, the parties’ stipulation, which does not reference a settlement or reserve the
court’s jurisdiction over such an agreement, took effect immediately upon its filing. Fed.

1

Prior to dismissal, defendants sent plaintiff two letters indicating that they would not send a check
to a non-attorney third party. (Dkt. #102-1.) Whatever agreement the parties ultimately reached
is not part of the record.

R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A); Jenkins v. Vill. of Maywood, 506 F.3d 622, 624 (7th Cir. 2007). The
Seventh Circuit has declared in no uncertain terms that “when a suit is dismissed with
prejudice, it is gone[.]” Dupuy v. McEwen, 495 F.3d 807, 809 (7th Cir. 2007); see also Hill
v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 405 F.3d 572, 576 (7th Cir. 2005) (“[A] case that is dismissed
with prejudice is unconditional; therefore, it’s over and federal jurisdiction is terminated.”).
Although a federal court may retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement
after a case is dismissed by: (1) dismissing the case without prejudice and expressly retaining
jurisdiction over the settlement agreement; or (2) incorporating the settlement agreement
into the judgment, neither of these things occurred here. Jones v. Ass’n of Flight AttendantsCWA, 778 F.3d 571, 573 (7th Cir. 2015). Keys might have some type of contract claim,
but that would arise under state law. Id. at 573-74 (“A disagreement about whether parties
to a settlement have honored their commitments is a contract dispute.”). Consequently,
this court cannot exercise jurisdiction over the current dispute.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1) Plaintiff Louis Keys’ motion for reconsideration (dkt. #99) is DENIED.
2) Plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants to send the settlement check to his
power of attorney (dkt. #102) is DENIED.
Entered this 26th day of October, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

2