Fusilier v. State of Kansas

Appellate Case: 26-3056 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 07/30/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 30, 2026 _______________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court KAREN M. FUSILIER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 26-3056 (5:25-CV-04132-JWB-BGS) STATE OF KANSAS; KRISTEN (D. Kan.) STINNETT; LOUISE CODY; SHANNON COOPER; SUSAN LOY; ROBERT HOLUBEC; JEFF EASTER; KELLIE HOGAN; MARC BENNETT; MARK ORR; JAN JARMAN; SEAN HATFIELD; CHRISTOPHER MAJANA; JENNIFER MAJANA; SAM KEPFIELD; ROBIN KARP; TRAVIS HAMRICK; CHIANNA J.

HEMKEN; KARA RATZLAFF; ROSA TREJO; VANESSA ROSCO; JOHNATHEN RUPP; BECKY HURIG; DELLEN FLETCHER; JEANIZE WINSOR; BRENT WINSOR; PATRIA R. COTTEN; KYLE PERRY; SPENCER KASTIN; NICHOLE SWITZER; KAMERON EVANS; TRYGVE PALMER; BRADLEY BURCHETT; HOLLY CASH; TRAVIS EASTER; DOUGLAS COOK; SHAWN THOMAS; REX LEFFEW; LISA URBING; ROTH TRENTON; RYAN SNYDER; TREVOR MACY; LUGO MAGUM; DELANY YONCHEK; GLEN WHISBY; ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL; DALTON ROBERTS; DARLENE ZERR; ERICK LANDON; VALERIE SHIRKEY; RICK PENA; MARIO OCON; Appellate Case: 26-3056 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 07/30/2026 Page: 2

JUSTIN WOODY; CORRIE MCCLUSKEY; CHRISTOPHER WELS; JOTHATHAN NEWLAND; RYAN MASENTHIN; CHRISTAN THOMAS; DILLON DICKERSON; MARLON WOOLCOCK; EDWARD BROWER; LARRY CARLSON; ANDREA WICKSTRUM; DIANA BOWMAN-TROUNG; HOWARD MILLER; CRYSTAL SCHELL; JASON BARTEL; KACEY WEIDNER; KELLY MAR; ALENJANDRO MIJARES; PAULA MIJARES; REGINA (LNU), Comcare of Wichita, KS employee, Defendants - Appellees. _______________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _______________________________________ Before BACHARACH, McHUGH, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _______________________________________

Ms. Karen M. Fusilier sued for “Crimes which the State (Allegedly) Commits Against Us in the Family Courts.” R. at. 16–22. In the complaint, Ms. Fusilier invoked federal criminal statutes, federal employment

* Oral argument would not help us decide the appeal, so we have decided the appeal based on the record and the briefing. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).

This order and judgment does not constitute binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.

But the order and judgment may be cited for its persuasive value if otherwise appropriate. See Fed. R. App. P. 32.1(a); 10th Cir. R. 32.1(A).

Appellate Case: 26-3056 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 07/30/2026 Page: 3 statutes, and state laws, stating that she had suffered a “loss of property” and a “loss of freedom.” Id. at 13. But the complaint did not say what each defendant had done or how he or she had violated the law.

The district court dismissed the complaint, reasoning that Ms. Fusilier had failed to • allege subject-matter jurisdiction or • provide a short and plain statement showing a right to relief.

Ms. Fusilier appeals. Because she is pro se, we must liberally construe the complaint and her appeal brief. Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836, 840 (10th Cir. 2005). But even pro se parties must comply with the procedural rules applicable to other litigants.

See id. These rules require an appellant to explain why the district court’s reasoning was wrong. See Nixon v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 784 F.3d 1364, 1369 (10th Cir. 2015) (affirming the dismissal of a claim when the appellant’s opening brief had failed to challenge the basis for the district court’s ruling).

Ms. Fusilier hasn’t explained why the district court was wrong in concluding that she hadn’t • alleged subject matter jurisdiction or • provided a short and plain statement showing a right to relief.

Appellate Case: 26-3056 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 07/30/2026 Page: 4

So we affirm the dismissal. 1 Entered for the Court

Robert E. Bacharach Circuit Judge