
USCA1 Opinion

	




          July 20, 1993         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ___________________          No. 93-1296                                   ELEANOR A. BENT,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                       MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                  __________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ___________________                                        Before                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,                                         ___________                          Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ___________________               Eleanor A. Bent on brief pro se.               _______________               Frank E. Reardon, Michael J. Racette and Hassan & Reardon on               ________________  __________________     ________________          brief for appellees Massachusetts  General Hospital and Cornelius          Grania, M.D.               Susan H. Williams  and Taylor, Anderson  & Travers on  brief               _________________      ___________________________          for appellee Falmouth Hospital.               James A. Polcari  and Dunn  & Rogers on  brief for  appellee               ________________      ______________          Alan Cordts, M.D.               Jennifer Ellis Burke and Taylor, Anderson & Travers on brief               ____________________     __________________________          for appellee South Shore Hospital.               John  M. Dellea and Ficksman & Conley on brief for appellees               _______________     _________________          Burton Mendel, M.D. and Lahey Clinic Foundation.                                  __________________                                  __________________                      Per Curiam.   We  conclude that the  district court                      __________            properly dismissed  plaintiff's  action for  lack of  subject            matter jurisdiction.                   Plaintiff complained of the treatment she and her mother            received from  various private doctors and  other health care            providers.    She contended  the  providers'  conduct was  so            egregious as to amount to a deprivation of her constitutional            rights  to  privacy,  life,   liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of            happiness.     Because the defendants are all private actors,            plaintiff has failed to state any viable federal civil rights            claim under 42 U.S.C.   1983.  Mendez v. Belton, 739 F.2d 15,                                           ________________            17  (1st Cir. 1984).  At  best, plaintiff set forth state law            causes of action.   As complete  diversity of citizenship  is            lacking between  the parties, the federal  district court did            not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the state law  claims and            properly dismissed the action.  Lundquist v. Precision Valley                                            _____________________________            Aviation, Inc., 946  F.2d 8,  10 (1st Cir.  1991) ("Under  28            ______________            U.S.C.   1332(a)(1), there is diversity of citizenship if the            plaintiff is a `citizen' of a different state than all of the                                                               ___            defendants.") (emphasis added); Franklin  v. Murphy, 745 F.2d                                            ___________________            1221, 1229 (9th Cir.  1984) (absent diversity, district court            has no subject  matter jurisdiction over medical  malpractice            claim against private defendants).                 Affirmed.                  ________                                         -2-
