Dusan Dragisich v. West Allis Memorial Hospital

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted May 10, 2024 *
Decided May 10, 2024
Before
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge
AMY J. ST. EVE, Circuit Judge
JOHN Z. LEE, Circuit Judge
No. 23-2803
DUSAN DRAGISICH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
WEST ALLIS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,
et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin.
No. 23-cv-731-pp
Pamela Pepper,
Chief Judge.
O R D E R
Dusan Dragisich, a Wisconsin prisoner, sued several correctional and medical
facilities for subjecting him to improper medical treatment and excessive force. A
magistrate judge screened Dragisich’s complaint and dismissed it for failure to state a
* The appellees were not served with process and are not participating in this
appeal. We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and
record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not
significantly aid the court. FED. R. A PP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with FED. R. A PP. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 23-2803 Page 2
claim, noting that (1) none of the named defendants was a suable “person” under
42 U.S.C. § 1983; (2) the 20-page complaint violated the “short and plain statement”
requirement under Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and (3) Dragisich
impermissibly brought unrelated claims against unrelated parties, in violation of Rules
18 and 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dragisich amended his complaint but
did not cure the identified defects, so the district judge dismissed his suit for failure to
state a claim.
Dragisich appealed, but his appellate brief does not engage the district court’s
rationale for dismissing his case, apart from stating that his prior submissions were
marred by mental-health issues. He says that he has been receiving psychotropic
medication for bipolar, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and mood disorders. Now that he
has “come off [his] anti-psychotics,” he says his mind is clear and he would like another
chance to amend his complaint.
The limited scope of this appeal, however, precludes us from reviewing anything
other than the district court’s dismissal of Dragisich’s amended complaint. After a
district court enters final judgment, a plaintiff may amend a complaint only if he has
successfully altered or amended the judgment or if the judgment has otherwise been
vacated. Spiegel v. McClintic, 916 F.3d 611, 619 (7th Cir. 2019). Dragisich’s problem is
that he chose to appeal the district court’s judgment rather than move for leave to
amend. See Webber v. Armslist LLC, 70 F.4th 945, 968 (7th Cir. 2023). Although we
sympathize with Dragisich’s circumstances, we see no basis to disturb the district
court’s judgment.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --