Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Bablitch ends court career on top

By: dmc-admin//September 10, 2003//

Bablitch ends court career on top

By: dmc-admin//September 10, 2003//

Listen to this article

Bablitch

Justice William A. Bablitch

In the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s 2002-03 term, Justice William A. Bablitch was the justice most likely to be in the majority, displacing Justice David Prosser, who had occupied that position the two previous terms.

On the other end, the justice most likely to dissent was Diane S. Sykes, edging out Justice Ann Walsh Bradley and Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson, who had occupied that position the last two years, as well.

Bablitch was in the majority in 82 of the 89 cases the court decided, dissenting in only 6 cases, and not participating in 1. That placed Bablitch on the winning side in 93 percent of cases, up from 85 percent last year.

Sykes, however, who also was in the majority in 85 percent of cases in 2001-02, joined the majority in the last term in only 68 cases, dissented in 20, and did not participate in 1, for a percentage of only 77 percent.

In four cases during the term, Sykes filed a lone dissent, as many as the rest of the justices combined. Abrahamson wrote three lone dissents, and Prosser one.

Two justices were close behind Bablitch, with Prosser and Justice N. Patrick Crooks in the majority in 91 percent of cases; Justice Wilcox was also close behind at 88 percent. Chief Justice Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley trailed the pack substantially, landing in the majority in 78 percent of decisions. Both dissented in 19 cases, just one less than Sykes.

Of the 89 cases the court decided in the term, the court was unanimous in 45, while 44 resulted in at least one dissenter (cases in which no decision resulted, due to an even split on the court, or a conclusion that review was improvidently granted, and orders deciding motions for reconsideration or other relief were not counted).

Four to Three

In sharply divided cases decided by a four to three vote, Prosser came out on top the most often, joining the majority in nine of 12 such cases. Bablitch and Crooks were right behind in this category, with eight cases in the majority.

Abrahamson and Bradley were next, with seven apiece. Wilcox was in the majority in five cases, and Sykes was in the majority in only four of the twelve cases decided by a four to three vote.

Less Polarized

In all, however, the court appears less polarized than it has been in the recent past. In split decisions issued in the 2000-01 term ago, the court had two combinations of justices who were almost invariably on the same side, but apart from the other combination: Crooks and Wilcox; and Abrahamson and Bradley.

Of 90 cases decided in that term, both combinations sided together in all but 4 decisions, a 96 percent rate of concurrence overall, and a 91 percent rate of concurrence in the split decisions.

However, save for the unanimous cases, those two combinations of justices rarely agreed with each other. Justice Abrahamson sided with Wilcox and Crooks in only 14 percent of divided cases, while Bradley sided with Wilcox only 19 percent of the time, and with Crooks only 23 percent.

In the most recent term, Bradley and Abrahamson were again the most likely justices to agree; however, the rate of concurrence has fallen to 85 percent of the split decisions.

For Wilcox and Crooks, the close alignment in votes just two terms ago has dropped even more, with the two agreeing on 78 percent of split decisions this term.

That is a tie for the second highest rate of concurrence, with Wilcox and Prosser also concurring on 78 percent of split decisions.

The combination least likely to agree was Abrahamson and Sykes, who concurred in only 18 percent of split decisions. Second lowest was Abrahamson and Wilcox, at 26 percent.

Criminal Law

In criminal law cases, however, Wil-cox and Crooks retained their close alignment, concurring in 33 of 34 decisions. The court was unanimous in 18 criminal cases it heard during the term, and divided in 16.

That results in a 97 percent concurrence rate overall for Wilcox and Crooks, and 93 percent in the split cases. The next highest combinations
that concurred in split criminal cases were Bablitch/Wilcox and Abrahamson/Bradley, at 87 percent.

The least common concurrences, mean-while were Abrahamson/Prosser and Abrahamson/Sykes, both at only 13 percent.

However low that may be, it is not as low as the mere 6 percent concurrence rate between Abrahamson/Crooks and Abrahamson/Wilcox in the 2000-01 term, when Crooks and Wilcox sided with each other in every criminal case the court considered.

The two justices most likely to be in the majority in criminal law cases were Bablitch and Wilcox, each in the majority in 97 percent of such cases, all but one. Next was Prosser at 94 percent, dissenting only twice; followed by Crooks, at 91 percent, dissenting only three times.

A substantial gap existed between those four and the remaining three, however, with Sykes in the majority in only 79 percent; Bradley at 74 percent; and Abrahamson at only 68 percent, dissenting in 11 of the 34 cases the court heard.

Torts and Insurance

It was an entirely different story for Abrahamson in cases involving tort and insurance issues, however. Abrahamson was in the majority in a perfect 100 percent of those cases. The court heard 20 such cases during the term, reaching unanimous decisions in 13, and split decisions in seven.

Links

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Related Resources

Chart: Who’s in the majority?

Chart: Criminal decision majority?

Chart: Tort-Insurance decision majority?

Bablitch and Crooks were the next most likely to be in the majority, with each dissenting only once. Bradley, Prosser, and Wilcox each dissented three times. Least likely to be in the majority on tort and insurance cases was Sykes, who dissented in five of the seven cases that produced a divided court, and was in the majority in only 74 percent of cases.

Again, however, the court was far less polarized than in previous years. The lowest rate of concurrence in nonunanimous tort and insurance cases between any justices was 29 percent, between Bradley/Crooks and Bradley/Prosser.

While that may sound low, it is not when contrasted with the previous term. During the 2001-02 term, the court decided 15 tort/insurance cases, producing unanimous decisions in only 6. Of those 9 split decisions, Bradley and Crooks were on opposite sides in every single case.

During the most recent term, the Justices agreeing most often in divided tort cases were Abrahamson and Bablitch, at 83 percent, followed by Abrahamson and Bradley, at 80 percent.

David Ziemer can be reached by email.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests