Kikifer’s Entrepreneurial Academy, Keishonda Williamson, and Henry McDavid v. Winnebago County Community Health Board, Region 1 Planning Council, Winnebago County, Illinois, and Winnebago County Community Health Board Members

Kikifer’s Entrepreneurial Academy · United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division · March 3, 2026 · No. No. 25 C 50082

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed without prejudice a Third Amended Complaint alleging race discrimination in the denial of mental-health grant applications. The court held that the individual plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because they did not allege a concrete personal injury, and that the complaint failed to provide sufficient factual specificity regarding each defendant’s role and the asserted discrimination theories. Plaintiffs were granted leave to file a Fourth Amended Complaint within 28 days.

Holdings

  1. Williamson and McDavid lacked Article III standing because they alleged only vague emotional and psychological harm arising from the denial of their employer’s grant application and did not allege a concrete, personal injury.
  2. KEA’s Third Amended Complaint failed to state a claim because it used impermissible collective allegations, did not identify the specific role of each Defendant, and did not clearly identify the applicable discrimination theory or challenged policy.
  3. The dismissal was without prejudice, and Plaintiffs were granted leave to file a Fourth Amended Complaint within 28 days.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether KEA employees Williamson and McDavid alleged a concrete, personal injury sufficient to establish Article III standing.
  2. Whether KEA’s Third Amended Complaint stated plausible civil-rights claims when it failed to identify which Defendant took which allegedly unlawful action and did not clearly identify the discrimination theories or challenged policies.
  3. Whether dismissal should be with prejudice or without prejudice and whether Plaintiffs should receive leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed

Cases Cited (26)

  • Esco v. City of Chicago, 107 F.4th 673, 678 (7th Cir. 2024)(followed)
  • Philos Technologies, Inc. v. Philos & D, Inc., 645 F.3d 851, 857-58 (7th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 602 U.S. 367, 378 (2024)(followed)
  • TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413, 417, 423-25 (2021)(followed)
  • Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992)(followed)
  • Bazile v. Financial Systems of Green Bay, Inc., 983 F.3d 274, 278 (7th Cir. 2020)(followed)
  • Silha v. ACT, Inc., 807 F.3d 169, 173 (7th Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • Patterson v. Howe, 96 F.4th 992, 996 (7th Cir. 2024)(followed)
  • Ewing v. MED-1 Solutions, LLC, 24 F.4th 1146, 1151 (7th Cir. 2022)(followed)
  • Pierre v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., 29 F.4th 934, 941 (7th Cir. 2022)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 26.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…