2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Third C ircuit 10-29-2009 

# Amir Mc C ain v

. Epi scop al H o sp P re c e de nt i al or Non-P re c e de nt i al : Non-P re c e de nt i al D ocke t No . 09-3092

F o llow thi s and a ddit ion al works at : http://digit alc ommon s .l a w . vill anova . e du/thirdc ircuit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s brou ght t o you for f re e and ope n a c c e s s by the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Third C ircuit at V ill anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Digit al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s by an authori z e d a dmini s trat or of V ill anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Digit al Reposit ory

. F or more inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vill anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Amir Mc C ain v

. Ep i s c op al H osp " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 354. http://digit alc ommon s .l a

w . vill anova . e du/thirdc ircuit_2009/3541

CL D- 0 2 0 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 09- 3092

___________ AM I R H AKI M M CC AI N, AD M I NI STRATO R O F THE ESTATE OF D ECEA SED J UA NI TA FELDER AND A/K/A J OHN MCC AI N, AN- NI S A, I ND I VI DU ALLY I N H I S OW N R I GH T,

A m i rH aki m M cC ai n,

A ppel l ant v . E P IS C O P A L H O S P IT A L ; H O SPI TA L O F TH E U N I V ER SI TY O F

P E N N S Y L V A N IA

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt forthe East ern D i s tr i ctof Penns y l vani a ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 09- cv- 02385) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Eduar do R obr eno

____________________________________ S u b mi tt e d f

o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l P u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) o r S u m m a ry A c tio n P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6 O ct ober22, 2009 B efor e: B A R R Y , FI SH E R and C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: O ct ober29, 2009)

_________ OP I NI ON

_________2

P E R C UR I AM A m ir H a k im M c C a in a p p e a ls f ro m th e D istric t C o u rt’s o rd e r d ism iss in g h is compl ai nt . Forthe fol l ow i ng r eas ons , w e w i l l di s m i s s M cC ai n’ s appea l pur s uantt o 28 U . S . C . § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B )(i ). I. O n M ay26, 2009, M cC ai n, act i ng as “A dm i ni s tr at orof the Est at e of D ece as ed J u a n ita F e ld e r a n d a /k /a J o h n M c C a in , A n -N is a M c C a in , In d iv id u a lly in h is o w n R ig h t,” fi l ed a c om pl ai nti n the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC ourtforthe East ern D i s tr i ctof Penns y l vani a aga i ns tE pi s copal H os pi t al and the H os pi t al of the U ni ver s i tyof P e n n sy lv a n ia. M c C a in ’s c o m p lain t alle g e d th a t th e h o sp itals, a c tin g u n d e r c o lo r o f sta te law , v io late d h is c o n stitu tio n a l rig h ts b yre f u sin g to tu rn o v e r b io lo g ica l, t o x ico lo g ica l, and D N A t est s that M cC ai n b el i eves w ou l d just i fyfurther cr i m i nal orci vil act i on s agai nst th e h o s p ita ls in c o n n e c tio n w ith th e d e a th s o f J u a n ita F e ld e r a n d M c C a in ’s u n b o rn s o n . On J u n e 5 , 2 0 0 9 , M c Ca i n mo v e d t o p r o c e e d wi th h i s c l a i ms i n f o rmap a u p e r i s . On J ul y1, 2009, the D i s tr i ctC ourtgr ant ed i n form a paupe r i s s t atus t o appel l ant , and d is m is s e d h is c o m p la in t u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 ). II. W e h a v e ju risd ictio n o v e r th is a p p e a l u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . B e c a u se M c C a in is p ro c e e d in g in f

o rm a p a u p e ri s , w e m u s t d is m is s th e a p p e a l u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 19 15 ( e ) ( 2) ( B) i f i tl a c ks a n a r gu a bl e ba s i s i n f a c torl a w . N e i t z ke v. W i l l i a ms, 49 0 U. S.3

3 1 9 , 3 2 5 (19 8 9 ). T hi s i s M cC ai n’ s s econd a tt empt , as a pr o s e l i t i gant , t o br i ng a § 1983 ac t i on on behal f on J uani t a Fel der . See M cC ai n v. A br aham, C . A . N o. 08- 3375, 2009 W L 1608511 ( 3d. C i r . J une 10, 2009) . W e r ei t er at e that“a pr o s e l i t i gantw ho i s notan att orneym ay notr epr es ents om eone e l s e i n fede r al court . ” I d. at*1; s ee a l s o O s ei - A fr i y i e v. M ed. C o ll. o f P e n n ., 9 3 7 F .2 d 8 7 6 , 8 8 2 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 1 ) (h o ld in g th a t a n o n -a tto rn e yp a re n t co u ld n o tp r o c e e d p r o s e o n b e h a l f o f h i s o rh e rc h i l d r e n i n f

e d e r a l c o u rt ) . F u rth e rmo r e , a s we exp l ai ned t o M cC ai n in di sm i ssi ng his previ ou s appea l , § 1 98 3 “d oes no tprovide a cause o f a c tio n o n b e h a lf

o f a d e c e a se d b a se d u p o n a lleg e d v io latio n o f th e d e c e a se d ’s c iv il r i ght s w hi ch occ urr ed af t erhi s death. ” M cC ai n, 2009 W L 1608511, at*1 ( quot i ng G uyt on v. Phi l l i ps , 606 F. 2d 248, 250 ( 9th C i r . 1979) ) . Forthes e r eas ons , M cC ai n l acks s ta n d in g to litig a te c la im s o n b e h a lf o f F e ld e r o r h e r e s ta te . T o th e e x ten t th a t M c C a in a lso se e k s re d re ss f o r a lleg e d v io latio n s o f

h is o w n c iv il r i ght s , M cC ai n’ s cl ai m s ar e w i thoutm er i t . T o s t at e a c l ai m under42 U . S. C . § 1983, M cC ai n m us ts how thatthe Epi s copal H os pi t al and the H os pi t al of the U ni ver s i tyof P enn sy l van i a (1) viol at ed h i s federal or C on st i tuti on al ri gh t s, and (2) that theydid so w hi l e ac t i ng undercol orof s t at e l aw . Fl agg B r os . , I nc. v. B r ooks , 436 U . S. 149, 155- 56 ( 1978) ; G r om an v. T w p. of M anal apan, 47 F. 3d 628, 638 ( 3d C i r . 1995) . M cC ai n has fai l ed t o art i cul at e how the hos pi t al s ’ al l eged a ct i ons - i n es s ence , w i thhol di ng in f o rm a tio n th a t co u ld p o ten tiallyf o rm th e b a sis o f

a h yp o th e tica l f

u tu re c rim in a l o r c iv ila c tio n - v io la te d a ri g h t th a t e ith e r t h e C o n s titu tio n o r f e d e ra l la w p ro te c ts . F urtherm ore, even assum i ng that w i thh oldi ng i nfo rm at i on un der these ci r cumst ance s s om ehow vi ol at ed a c ogni zabl e fe der al r i ght , M cC ai n m ake no a l l egat i ons t o s upporthi s cl ai m thatthe hos pi t al s w er e ac t i ng undercol orof s t at e l aw . “[T] her e i s no lia b ility u n d e r § 1 9 8 3 f

o r t h o s e n o t a c tin g u n d e r c o lo r o f la w .” G ro m a n , 4 7 F .3 d a t 6 3 8 . A lth o u g h M c C a in a ss e rts th a t th e h o sp itals w e re a c tin g u n d e r c o lo r o f sta te la w , the re is n o a lleg a tio n th a t th e E p isc o p a l H o sp ital o r th e H o sp ital o f th e U n iv e rsityo f

P e n n sy lv a n ia a re sta te a c to rs, th a t th e yh a v e “ a c ted to g e th e r w ith ” o r h a v e “ o b tain e d sig n if ica n t aid fro m stat e o ff

ici als, ” o r th at th eir co n d u ct i s “o therw ise ch arg ea b le t o the S tat e.” L u g ar v E dm onds on O i l C o. , I nc. , 457 U . S. 922, 923 ( 1982) ; J or dan v. Fox, R oths chi l d, O ’ B r i en & Fr ankel , 20 F. 3d 1250, 1264- 65 ( 3d C i r . 1994) . O therthan M cC ai n’ s bar e as s ert i on, ther e i s nothi ng i n the compl ai ntt o s ugges tthatei therdefe ndantw as act i ng undercol or of s t at e l aw . A s hcr oftv. I qbal , U . S. , 129 S. C t . 1937, 1951 ( 2009) ( hol di ng th a t c o n c lu s o ry a lle g a tio n s a re n o t e n title d to th e a s s u m p tio n o f tru th ). III . A f terc o n d u c tin g a n in d e p e n d e n t re v iew , w e c o n c lu d e th a t M c C a in ’s a p p e a l is w ith o u t a rg u a b le m e ri t. W e w ill d is m is s th e a p p e a l p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 )( B )( i) .

4