Reginald Jermaine Mims v. Logan Brown, et al.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin
DecidedNovember 20, 2025
Docket3:25-cv-00042
StatusUnknown

This text of Reginald Jermaine Mims v. Logan Brown, et al. (Reginald Jermaine Mims v. Logan Brown, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reginald Jermaine Mims v. Logan Brown, et al., (W.D. Wis. 2025).

Opinion

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

REGINALD JERMAINE MIMS,

Plaintiff, ORDER v.

25-cv-42-jdp LOGAN BROWN, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Reginald Jermaine Mims, representing himself, is proceeding against defendants Paul Morris and James Wilson, representing themselves, on state-law assault claims. Dkt. 6 at 2. Plaintiff alleges that he became involved in a dispute with these two defendants while they were trying to tow his vehicle and that they assaulted him, so he hit Morris in self- defense.1 Morris and Wilson have each filed a motion to seal their contact information because plaintiff allegedly threatened during the dispute to murder them. Dkt. 20 & Dkt. 22. The court has docketed these motions ex-parte, meaning that the motions are visible only to the court and the person who filed them, because the motions contain the contact information at issue. The court will GRANT defendants’ motions and maintain their contact information under seal for now. Court records are “presumptively open to public view, even if the litigants strongly prefer secrecy, unless a statute, rule, or privilege justifies confidentiality.” In re Specht, 622 F.3d 697, 701 (7th Cir. 2010). At this very early stage in the case, these defendants’

1 Plaintiff is proceeding on Fourth Amendment excessive force and Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claims against the remaining defendants. Dkt. 6 at 6. addresses are not relevant to the case, and there is not an apparent need for the information to be made public. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 5.2(e)(1) (a court may order redaction of additional information for good cause). But the court will revisit this issue at the preliminary pretrial conference on December 15, 2025, and discuss with the parties whether these defendants’

contact information will remain sealed as the case progresses and, if so, how these parties may conduct discovery under those circumstances.

ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Defendant Paul Morris’s motion to seal his address, Dkt. 20, is GRANTED. 2. Defendant James Wilson’s motion to seal his address, phone number and email, Dkt. 22, is GRANTED.

Entered November 20, 2025. BY THE COURT:

/s/ ________________________________________ ANITA MARIE BOOR Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Specht
622 F.3d 697 (Seventh Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reginald Jermaine Mims v. Logan Brown, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reginald-jermaine-mims-v-logan-brown-et-al-wiwd-2025.