Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-14-03655/USCOURTS-ca7-14-03655-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

Submitted November 6, 2015*

Decided November 13, 2015 

Before 

WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge 

JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge 

DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

No. 14-3655 

CAROL S. BUTCHER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

SOUTH SHORE HOSPITAL, et al., 

 Defendants-Appellees.

 Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division. 

No. 13 C 7476 

John W. Darrah, 

Judge. 

O R D E R 

Carol Butcher appeals the dismissal of her complaint alleging injuries in 

connection with her daughter’s stay at South Shore Hospital in Chicago. The district 

court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and we affirm. 

In October 2013 Butcher brought this suit ostensibly on behalf of herself and her 

daughter against South Shore and its employees for harm that occurred during her 

 

*

 After examining the briefs and record, we have concluded that oral argument is 

unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the briefs and record. See FED. R. APP. P.

34(a)(2)(C). 

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 

Case: 14-3655 Document: 63 Filed: 11/13/2015 Pages: 3
No. 14-3655 Page 2 

daughter’s stay in the hospital’s intensive care unit. The complaint and accompanying 

emergency motion alleged that South Shore employees intentionally harmed and 

mistreated her daughter while in intensive care, and barred Butcher from visiting her 

daughter at the hospital. Judge John Lee, the acting emergency judge, dismissed the 

complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, denied the emergency motion, but 

granted Butcher leave to file an amended complaint setting forth the basis for federal 

jurisdiction. 

Eight months later, Butcher filed another emergency motion, which Judge Andrea 

Wood, the acting emergency judge, denied while noting “skepticism” that Butcher’s 

claim presented any basis for subject-matter jurisdiction. Butcher then amended her 

complaint and filed a third emergency motion, adding additional defendants and 

invoking 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as the basis for federal jurisdiction, but restating substantially 

the same allegations. Judge John Darrah granted the defendants’ unopposed motion to 

dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding that Butcher failed to allege facts 

to state a plausible claim under § 1983 or any federal law, or to allege facts to support 

diversity jurisdiction. He granted Butcher leave to amend within 30 days, and then 

entered a final dismissal after that time period lapsed. Butcher filed a motion for 

reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which the district court 

denied. 

On appeal Butcher1 only generally challenges the district court’s rulings, as she 

continues to express dissatisfaction with her daughter’s medical care and the denial of 

her visitation rights. Notwithstanding her reference to § 1983, Butcher cannot plausibly 

state any claim under the Constitution or federal law because “conduct which merely 

engenders common law tort liability, without infringing on constitutionally protected 

interests, is not a sufficient basis to support a cause of action under Section 1983.” See 

Cameo Convalescent Ctr., Inc. v. Senn, 738 F.2d 836, 845 (7th Cir. 1984) (internal quotation 

omitted). Furthermore, as a private actor not acting under color of state law, South Shore 

is not liable under § 1983, see Hallinan v. Fraternal Order of Police of Chi. Lodge No. 7, 570 

F.3d 811, 815 (7th Cir. 2009). Her complaint is therefore insufficient to establish any basis 

for federal-question jurisdiction. 

We note also that the district court certified that this appeal was taken in bad faith 

when it denied her motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Butcher is warned that 

 

1 In May 2015, we granted the request of Butcher’s daughter to be removed from 

this appeal. 

Case: 14-3655 Document: 63 Filed: 11/13/2015 Pages: 3
No. 14-3655 Page 3 

further pursuit of this frivolous litigation will result in sanctions. See In re City of Chicago, 

500 F.3d 582, 585–86 (7th Cir. 2007); Support Sys. Int’l, Inc. v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185, 186 (7th 

Cir. 1995). 

AFFIRMED. 

Case: 14-3655 Document: 63 Filed: 11/13/2015 Pages: 3