Seidl v. Berz and McMiller - W.D. Wisconsin Dismisses Civil Complaint With Prejudice

Jump To

Top Caption Trial Court Document

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

April 16, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Larry Melford Seidl v. Ellen Berz and Tracy L. McMiller

District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

• Citations: None known
• Docket Number: 3:25-cv-00987

• Precedential Status: Unknown Status

• Opinion

• Authorities (5)

• Cited By (0)

• Summaries (0)

• Similar Cases (841)

• PDF

Trial Court Document

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

LARRY MELFORD SEIDL,

Plaintiff,
OPINION and ORDER
v.

25-cv-987-jdp
ELLEN BERZ and TRACY L. MCMILLER,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Larry Melford Seidl, proceeding without counsel, was detained at the Iowa
County jail. Seidl alleges that he told defendant Tracy McMiller, an assistant district attorney,
that the victim in his criminal case also committed crimes against him, but McMiller didn’t ask
further questions or file charges against the victim.1 Seidl also alleges that defendant Ellen Berz,
a state court judge, didn’t let him talk about the crimes committed against him during his
June 2025 trial.
Seidl’s complaint is before the court for screening. I must dismiss any portion of his
complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or asks for money
damages from a defendant who by law cannot be sued for money damages. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915 (e)(2)(B), 1915A(b). I must accept the factual allegations in his complaint as true and
interpret his complaint generously, holding it to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers. Arnett v. Webster, 658 F.3d 742, 751 (7th Cir. 2011).
Seidl’s complaint fails to state a claim for relief.

1 Seidl doesn’t identify McMiller as an assistant district attorney, but the court takes judicial
notice that she is one. See State v. Jones, No. 2019AP932, 2020 WL 13356994 (Wis. Ct. App.
Dec. 23, 2020).
Seidl cannot state a claim against McMiller based on these allegations because she is an
assistant district attorney entitled to absolute immunity for prosecutorial functions “intimately
associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process,” including determining whether
charges should be brought. Lewis v. Mills, 677 F.3d 324, 330 (7th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted).

Seidl also cannot state a claim against Berz for the same reason the court dismissed
Seidl’s previous case against her. No. 25-cv-859-jdp. Judges can’t be sued for acts taken in their
judicial capacity. See Dawson v. Newman, 419 F.3d 656, 660 (7th Cir. 2005). They are immune
from suit. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991).
I will dismiss the case in its entirety for Seidl’s failure to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. When a plaintiff proceeds without counsel, the court of appeals has cautioned
against dismissing his case without giving him a chance to amend the complaint. Felton v. City
of Chicago, 827 F.3d 632, 636 (7th Cir. 2016). But amendment would be futile because Seidl’s

complaint is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory. Bogie v. Rosenberg, 705 F.3d 603,
608 (7th Cir. 2013).
I will direct the clerk of court to record a second strike against Seidl under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915 (g).

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff Larry Melford Seidl’s complaint, Dkt. 1, is DISMISSED with prejudice
because it fails to state a claim and is frivolous.
2. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment and close the case.
3. The clerk of court is directed to record a second strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g)
against Seidl.
Entered April 15, 2026.
BY THE COURT:

/s/

JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge