Filed: Nov. 03, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 3, 2011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT CAROL A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 11-3175 v. D. Kansas CLAY COUNTY POLICE (D.C. No. 2:10-CV-02658-EFM-JPO) DEPARTMENT; JOHNSON COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; WYANDOTTE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. After examining the briefs and appell
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 3, 2011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT CAROL A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 11-3175 v. D. Kansas CLAY COUNTY POLICE (D.C. No. 2:10-CV-02658-EFM-JPO) DEPARTMENT; JOHNSON COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; WYANDOTTE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. After examining the briefs and appella..
More
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
November 3, 2011
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
TENTH CIRCUIT
CAROL A. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 11-3175
v. D. Kansas
CLAY COUNTY POLICE (D.C. No. 2:10-CV-02658-EFM-JPO)
DEPARTMENT; JOHNSON
COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
WYANDOTTE COUNTY POLICE
DEPARTMENT,
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this court has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,
however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th
Cir. R. 32.1.
On December 8, 2010, plaintiff-appellant Carol A. Williams filed a
complaint in federal district court alleging she was the victim of identity theft.
Williams sought to have her “name clear[ed] and exsponged [sic].” Upon motion
of Defendants, the district court dismissed the suit for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, concluding Williams had failed to demonstrate that the claims
asserted against Defendants arose under federal law. The court further concluded
Williams had failed to establish diversity jurisdiction and her complaint failed to
establish that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332;
Laughlin v. Kmart Corp.,
50 F.3d 871, 873 (10th Cir. 1995) (holding that the
requisite amount in controversy and the existence of diversity must be
affirmatively established in the pleading of the party seeking to invoke
jurisdiction). The district court also concluded the Johnson County Police
Department and the Wyandotte County Police Department are both subordinate
governmental entities that lack the capacity to sue or be sued. See Hopkins v.
State,
702 P.2d 311, 316 (Kan. 1985); Mays v. Wyandotte Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t,
419 F. App’x 794, 795 n.2 (10th Cir. 2011) (“The Wyandotte County Sheriff’s
Department lacks capacity to be sued in its own name.”).
This court reviews the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de
novo. See U.S. West, Inc. v. Tristani,
182 F.3d 1202, 1206 (10th Cir. 1999).
Based on our review of the record, the pleadings, and the arguments asserted by
Williams in her appellate brief, we conclude the district court did not err when it
-2-
dismissed Williams’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For
substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its Order dated June 8,
2011, we affirm the dismissal of Williams’s complaint.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Michael R. Murphy
Circuit Judge
-3-