McKenzie v. Guerrino

Background

Kellyann McKenzie, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Paul Guerrino and invoked federal-question jurisdiction. She alleged that, while she was at Guerrino’s dental practice with her daughter on July 2, 2021, a dental assistant helped remove a dressing from McKenzie’s injured finger. McKenzie alleged that the assistant intentionally cut packing at the edge of her finger, making it difficult to remove. McKenzie went to Montefiore Hospital, where a second surgery was unsuccessful and allegedly caused nerve damage. She also alleged psychological harm and aggravation of her bipolar condition. She sought $300,000 in damages.

The court had previously allowed McKenzie to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Under the federal statute governing such cases, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, failed to state a claim for relief, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

Federal Claim

McKenzie asserted that the dental assistant failed to provide proper medical care. The court found that she did not identify a viable federal cause of action. It explained that there is no general federal right to medical care, particularly from a private entity. A right to medical care by government authorities may arise in limited circumstances involving a special custodial or other relationship with the state, but McKenzie did not allege such a relationship.

The court also explained that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 generally requires a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law—that is, using authority attributable to a state or local government. McKenzie did not allege facts showing that Guerrino or his employees were state actors. The court therefore dismissed the federal claim for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

State-Law Claims and Amendment

The court stated that McKenzie did not allege facts supporting diversity jurisdiction; according to the opinion, she alleged that both she and Guerrino were New York citizens. After dismissing the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—the federal court’s authority to hear related state-law claims—over any state-law claims McKenzie may have been asserting.

The court denied leave to amend. Although courts generally give a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to correct a complaint, the court concluded that amendment would be futile because the defects could not be cured.

Disposition

The court dismissed McKenzie’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), dismissed all other pending matters, and directed the clerk to enter judgment. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied McKenzie permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.