By: Derek Hawkins//June 6, 2018//
WI Court of Appeals – District IV
Case Name: James Edward Grant v. John Schultz
Case No.: 2017AP534
Officials: BLANCHARD, J.
Focus: Due Process Violation
James Grant, pro se, appeals the circuit court’s dismissal of his small claims action for lack of proof. Defendant John Schultz has failed to file a timely brief, and the untimely brief that he has filed does not address any potential legal claim in this case. I affirm because Grant failed to state a claim for relief.
On appeal, Grant refers, in each case only briefly, to the following legal concepts: negligence; the constitutional right of due process; the availability of enforcement of constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; the general proposition that governmental agencies cannot act in vindictive, retaliatory, or arbitrary ways; and the general proposition that governmental entities must act consistently with regulations that they create. In addition, he mentions what he submits are “directional signage” rules of something called the American Restroom Association. As occurred in the trial, Grant fails to line up any allegation at trial with a valid legal claim.
Grant “asks this court to read his brief generously,” bearing in mind that he lacks legal training. I bear this in mind. However, his failure is complete. It is not a question of his having missed a step, used the wrong terms, or failed to understand details of a legal rule. Accordingly, I affirm dismissal.