Jaeger, Alexander v. City of Madison Attorney's Office et al
| Wisconsin Western District Court | |
| Judge: | William M Conley |
| Referred: | Anita Marie Boor |
| Case #: | 3:25-cv-00683 |
| Nature of Suit | 540 Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus - Mandamus & Other |
| Cause | 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Case Filed: | Aug 15, 2025 |
Create an account to get the full party report for this case.
| Docket last updated: 10/27/2025 11:59 PM CDT |
| Tuesday, October 14, 2025 | ||
| 5 | 5
order
Order Dismissing Complaint - Pro Se
Tue 10/14 10:31 AM
**TEXT ONLY ORDER** Plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging that the City of Madison's Attorney's Office, Police Department, Municipal Court, and Building Inspection Department selectively enforced an ordinance against him for posting a sign on his boat. Upon jurisdictional review, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Now plaintiff has filed what appears to be a supplemental statement further explaining his claims and identifying individual actors who violated his rights, including two police officers, the zoning director, two city attorneys, and a municipal judge. (Dkt. #4 .) Although it now appears that plaintiff may have one or more claims under federal law against some individual city employees and the city itself, he cannot sue the individual city departments and units named in the caption of his complaint. See Wis. Stat. § 62.25; Whiting v. Marathon County Sheriff's Dep't , 382 F.3d 700, 704 (7th Cir. 2004); More v. Callahan , No. 12-cv-905, 2014 WL 2890812, at *1 (W.D. Wis. June 25, 2014). Moreover, judges and prosecutors are typically immune from liability for money damages under § 1983. See Mireles v. Waco , 502 U.S. 9, 9 (1991); Imbler v. Pachtman , 424 U.S. 409, 420, 430 (1976). Therefore, the court will give plaintiff one, final opportunity to file an amended complaint, preferably using the court's forms for doing so:[LINK:Non-Prisoner Complaint Packet] . To comply with Rule 8, plaintiff must clearly identify the city and any individuals he wishes to sue in the caption of the complaint and repeat the allegations contained in his recently-filed supplement. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's proposed amended complaint (dkt. # 3 ) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff has until November 4, 2025, to file an amended complaint that complies with Rule 8 and the instructions in this order. If plaintiff files an amended complaint by that date, the court will review it, but if he files nothing, the court will dismiss this case with prejudice for failure to prosecute, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 10/14/2025. (nln),(ps) |
|
| Monday, October 06, 2025 | ||
| 4 | 4
3
pgs
motion
Proposed Amended Complaint
Mon 10/06 8:28 AM
Proposed Amended Complaint by Plaintiff Alexander L Jaeger. (lam),(ps) |
|
| Monday, September 15, 2025 | ||
| 3 | 3
order
Text Only Order
Mon 09/15 10:08 AM
** TEXT ONLY ORDER ** Plaintiff Alexander Jaeger, who is representing himself, has filed a complaint in which he appears to be claiming that various City of Madison departments and entities are somehow responsible for charging him with a zoning ordinance violation for placing a political sign on his vehicle. However, the court's preliminary review for potential jurisdictional issues shows that plaintiff's complaint fails to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which requires a plaintiff to provide notice to the defendants of what he believes each defendant did to violate his rights. Specifically, plaintiff does not provide any detail about: (1) what happened to him; (2) when it occurred; (3) what ordinance was enforced against him; and (4) what any individual(s) may have done to violate his rights under the United States Constitution or a federal statute. Moreover, without this information, it is not possible for the court to determine whether it has jurisdiction over plaintiff's potential claims. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's complaint (dkt. #1 ) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff has until October 6, 2025, to file an amended complaint that complies with Rule 8. If plaintiff files an amended complaint by that date, the court will review it for potential jurisdictional issues, but if he files nothing, the court will dismiss this case with prejudice for failure to prosecute, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 09/15/2025. (acd),(ps) |
|
| Friday, August 15, 2025 | ||
| 2 | 2
motion
Pro Se Order re Summons
Fri 08/15 3:32 PM
** TEXT ONLY ORDER ** The court is currently reviewing this case for potential jurisdictional issues. The clerk of court is directed not to issue summons until this court enters an order confirming that subject matter jurisdiction exists. If summonses are issued, plaintiff's deadline for service will be extended accordingly. See [LINK:Administrative Order 421] . Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 8/15/2025. (jls),(ps) |
|
| 1 | 1
5
pgs
cmp
Complaint
Fri 08/15 3:32 PM
COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Alexander L Jaeger; $405 Filing fee received, receipt number 4899. Case randomly assigned to District Judge William M. Conley. (jls),(ps) |
|