Sundsmo, Leonard v. Calkins, Kevin et al

Filing 83

ORDER that the motion for reconsideration submitted by plaintiff Leonard John Sundsmo, Dkt. 77 , is STRICKEN because it has not been properly signed by plaintiff. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 6/2/2015. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

LEONARD JOHN SUNDSMO,
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.

15-cv-2-jdp

KEVIN CALKINS, DEREK BURCH,
MIKE PICHLER, MARK R. SCHAUF,
RYAN LABROSCIAN, and ELENA LEON,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Leonard John Sundsmo brings this action against law enforcement officials from
the city of Baraboo, Sauk County, and state of Wisconsin for an allegedly illegal search and
arrest of plaintiff on November 4, 2014. In an April 15, 2015 order, I denied several motions
filed by plaintiff, including motions for entry of default, motions for preliminary injunctive
relief, a motion for my recusal, and a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Dkt. 76. In
that order, I noted that at least some of plaintiff’s filings appeared to have been submitted by
plaintiff’s father, who could not represent plaintiff in this lawsuit. I concluded that “[g]oing
forward, any document submitted by plaintiff must include his own written signature, in ink. I
will not consider any document signed by [plaintiff’s father] on behalf of plaintiff or any
document signed with a ‘/s/’ notation, and I will strike any such filing sua sponte.” Id. at 5-6.
Now before the court is a submission I understand to be a motion for reconsideration of
the April 15 order in this case as well as an April 15 order in plaintiff’s father’s closed case, no.
13-cv-682-jdp. The document includes electronic signature-style “/s/” notations in the signature
block for plaintiff, plaintiff’s father, and Angela Rose Mazerek, who was listed as a plaintiff in
the dismissed proposed amended complaint. Under the terms of the April 15 order in this case, I
will strike this filing because it has not been signed in ink by plaintiff. In any event, even if I did

not strike the document, I would deny plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration because nothing in
the document persuades me that I made any incorrect rulings in the April 15 order.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration submitted by plaintiff Leonard
John Sundsmo, Dkt. 77, is STRICKEN because it has not been properly signed by plaintiff.
Entered June 2, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2