Kyle Corrigan, et al. v. City of Oshkosh, et al.
This text of Kyle Corrigan, et al. v. City of Oshkosh, et al. (Kyle Corrigan, et al. v. City of Oshkosh, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
KYLE CORRIGAN, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v. Case No. 25-CV-1515
CITY OF OSHKOSH, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
Kyle Corrigan, proceeding pro se, filed this action on behalf of himself and Bright Line Investigations, LLC. The signature line of the complaint includes the name of Andrew Gile, who is identified as an attorney, and the Gile Law Group, a law firm in Columbus, Wisconsin. (ECF No. 1 at 8.) The court, however, has no record of an attorney by that name being admitted to practice in this district, and no attorney has appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs. Corrigan can represent himself, but an artificial entity like an LLC must proceed by counsel or not at all. Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201–02 (1993); Muzikowski v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 322 F.3d 918, 924 (7th Cir. 2003); Scandia Down Corp. v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423, 1427 (7th Cir. 1985). Within 20 days of this order an attorney licensed to practice in this district must appear on behalf of Bright Line Investigations, LLC. If counsel fails to appear, the court will dismiss Bright Line Investigations as a plaintiff.
SO ORDERED. Dated at Green Bay, Wisconsin this 31st day of October, 2025.
s/ Byron B. Conway BYRON B. CONWAY U.S. District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kyle Corrigan, et al. v. City of Oshkosh, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kyle-corrigan-et-al-v-city-of-oshkosh-et-al-wied-2025.