Comer, Mary v. Tolan, Daniel et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
MARY JOANNA COMER,
Plaintiff,
v.
DANIEL JOSEPH TOLAN
and SHARON JORGENSON,
Defendants.
OPINION and ORDER
26-cv-268-wmc
Plaintiff Mary Joanna Comer, representing herself, has filed a complaint against
defendants, a Polk County Circuit Court judge and the clerk of circuit court, alleging violations
of her federal constitutional rights. 	Plaintiff alleges that defendants have refused to accept
filings 	submitted 	by 	Thomas 	Edward 	Humphrey, 	a 	non-attorney 	who 	she 	calls 	her
“Constitutional Counsel of Choice,” in a state-court criminal case proceeding against her.
Dkt. 1, ¶ 1.
Now before this court is plaintiff’s motion seeking to file documents electronically.
Dkt. 3. To do so, a party must first register an account with PACER and then seek this court’s
permission to file electronically. 	The motion indicates that plaintiff has a PACER account,
that she consents to electronic service, that she understands that documents must be submitted
as unencrypted PDFs that comply with privacy protections, and that her signature will appear
on all of her filings.
The court will grant the motion, but with an important caveat. In all of plaintiff’s filings
to date, she notes that Humphrey is assisting her with the preparation documents, and his
signature appears on some of her filings. E.g., Dkt. 1 at 72. Plaintiff is cautioned that parties
in federal court must litigate their cases “personally or by counsel.” 	28 U.S.C. § 1654.
Case: 3:26-cv-00268-wmc Document #: 5 Filed: 03/31/26 Page 1 of 3

2
“Counsel” means a licensed attorney admitted to practice in this court. L.R. 83.5. Thus, for
good reason, a non-attorney like Humphrey cannot represent a party like plaintiff in a federal
court case, inclusive of filing motions or other documents, Lewis v. Lenc-Smith Mfg. Co., 784
F.2d 829, 830–31 (7th Cir. 1986), even if the non-attorney is a concerned citizen, Georgakis v.
Ill. State Univ., 722 F.3d 1075, 1077 (7th Cir. 2013). In sum, plaintiff must litigate this case
on her own or through an attorney. She is responsible for the contents of all of her submissions,
and she must personally sign and file those submissions using her PACER account. The court
may strike motions or other submissions that it determines have been signed or filed by a non-
party on plaintiff’s behalf.
Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. 	Dkt. 2. 	Upon
resolving that request, the next step involves screening the complaint. The court will dismiss
any portion of the complaint that is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, or asks for money damages from a defendant who by law cannot
be sued for money damages. See Rowe v. Shake, 196 F.3d 778, 783 (7th Cir. 1999) (the court
has the authority to “screen complaints filed by all litigants, prisoners and non-prisoners alike,
regardless of fee status.”). The complaint is currently under advisement, as is plaintiff’s request
for injunctive relief in the form of an order staying all state-court proceedings against her while
this federal lawsuit is pending. Dkt. 4. The court will address these items a separate order.
Case: 3:26-cv-00268-wmc Document #: 5 Filed: 03/31/26 Page 2 of 3

3
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Mary Joanna Comer’s motion for leave to file
electronically, Dkt. 3, is GRANTED, but plaintiff is cautioned that a non-attorney cannot
represent her in this lawsuit.
Entered March 31, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
ANITA MARIE BOOR
Magistrate Judge
Case: 3:26-cv-00268-wmc Document #: 5 Filed: 03/31/26 Page 3 of 3