Christopher Goodvine v. John and Jane Doe Nurses, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied Christopher Goodvine’s motion for reconsideration concerning his Monell claims against Milwaukee County and Wellpath, and denied as moot his motion concerning state-law claims. The court granted Sheriff Denita Ball’s motion to dismiss for lack of diligence because Goodvine failed to identify the Doe defendants or explain his inability to do so. The case was dismissed without prejudice.

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was denied because the plaintiff did not show a manifest error of law or fact, newly discovered evidence, or sufficient facts supporting a plausible inference that Milwaukee County or Wellpath maintained a policy or custom that caused his constitutional injury.
2. The motion for reconsideration concerning the state-law claims was denied as moot because the court was dismissing the case without prejudice for lack of diligence.
3. The action was properly dismissed without prejudice for lack of diligence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) because the plaintiff failed to identify the Doe defendants, failed to explain his inability to do so, and failed to respond to Sheriff Ball's motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should reconsider its screening determination that the complaint did not plausibly allege a Monell claim against Milwaukee County or Wellpath.
2. Whether the court should reconsider the screening order because it did not expressly state whether the plaintiff could proceed on state-law negligence and malpractice claims.
3. Whether the case should be dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for the plaintiff's failure to identify the Doe defendants and failure to respond to Sheriff Ball's motion.

Disposition

dismissed