UWM Student Association v. Lovell

In section 1983 action alleging that defendants-University administrators and other students improperly excluded plaintiffs-students from student government by unseating certain elected officers and replacing them with another student government organization, Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiffs’ action against certain defendants, who had not been served with instant complaint while matter was pending in state court and had not been served with amended complaint within 120 days after case had been removed to federal court. Under Rule 4(m), plaintiffs were required to serve defendants with amended complaint within 120 days after date of removal to federal court, and while Dist. Ct. had discretion to give plaintiffs more time to serve defendants, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in dismissing instant defendants from case due to lack of service. Also, with respect to properly served defendants, record showed that plaintiffs’ claim that defendants had violated their right to organize student government was moot, where: (1) plaintiffs’ request for prospective injunction relief would have been pointless, because 4 years had passed since last alleged wrongful act; (2) several elections had occurred subsequent to last wrongful act, and thus instant dispute over student govt. offices expired when subject terms to said offices had expired; and (3) any plaintiffs who are still on campus are free to persuade current student govt. to pass legislation favorable to their interests. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in dismissing with prejudice certain claims that were properly determined to have been misjoined, since appropriate remedy would have been to merely sever said claims or to dismiss said claims without prejudice.