Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-14-02716/USCOURTS-ca7-14-02716-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

Submitted March 12, 2015*

Decided March 12, 2015 

Before 

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge 

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

No. 14-2716 

SHUNTAY ANTONIO BROWN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

CHARLES T. RYAN, LTD., et al., 

 Defendants-Appellees.

 Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division. 

No. 13 C 5638 

Ronald A. Guzmán, 

Judge. 

O R D E R 

Shuntay Brown appeals from the denial of his motion to reconsider the dismissal 

of his federal civil-rights lawsuit. We affirm. 

 

*

 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NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION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: 14-2716 Document: 43 Filed: 03/12/2015 Pages: 2
No. 14-2716 Page 2 

Brown and Willie Lipscomb (for whom Brown is the legal guardian) were evicted 

from the condominium where they lived in 2012. Brown then sued his former landlords, 

the condominium association, its law firm, Bank of America, and the “Federal Reserve 

System,” alleging constitutional violations and violations of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12201–12213, in connection with his earlier bankruptcy and 

the state court’s eviction proceeding. The district court screened the complaint, 

see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2)(B), and dismissed it with prejudice, concluding that jurisdiction 

was lacking over Brown’s claim for damages exceeding $10,000 against an agency of the 

United States government, see 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), and over his remaining challenges to 

the state court’s eviction order. 

Less than three weeks later, Brown sought reconsideration of the dismissal, which 

the district court denied. Brown moved a second time for reconsideration, and the court 

dismissed this request as identical to the first. Several months later Brown without 

elaboration sought relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) and 

(b)(1); the district court denied this request in a minute entry. 

On appeal Brown asserts that his confusion about certain court deadlines was 

“excusable neglect” for purposes of Rule 60(b). But in his motion to the district court 

Brown did not put forward any reason that would justify relief under Rule 60(b). 

AFFIRMED. 

Case: 14-2716 Document: 43 Filed: 03/12/2015 Pages: 2