Regulatory takings standard takes center stage

Here’s a list of the cases the Wisconsin Supreme Court is scheduled to hear this month:

Thursday 9:45 a.m., Voces de la Frontera Inc. v. David Clarke: The case involves Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke’s public records dispute with an immigrant-advocacy group that filed a record request asking for copies of all federal immigration-detainer forms he had received during a particular four-month period. He eventually released the forms but only after blacking out certain information. Clarke has argued that federal law prevents him from releasing the documents in full. He is now appealing a decision affirming a trial judge’s order that he release the records.

10:45 a.m., McKee Family I LLC v. City of Fitchburg: The questions before the court in this case include whether the developers of a proposed luxury-apartment complex had a vested right in their development site for the project before the city rezoned the property and whether that rezoning amounted to an unconstitutional taking.

Nov. 9

9:45 a.m., Dennis Teague v. Brad Schimel: The case involves three plaintiffs who allege that the state’s Department of Justice is knowingly distributing inaccurate information every time it makes reference to them in criminal-history reports it has released. The Dane County Circuit Court had dismissed the lawsuit, which had alleged equal-protection and constitutional violations. The District 4 Court of Appeals affirmed that decision, noting the plaintiffs had failed to state any statutory or constitutional violations.

10:45 a.m., Randall Melchert v. Pro Electric Contractors: This civil lawsuit out of Waukesha County involves a dispute between the owners of a Brookfield property who sued a government contractor over damage caused by the installation of a traffic signal in 2012. The owners are appealing trial court and appeals court rulings that had found that the state’s immunity statutes for government contractors shielded Pro Electric from liability. The court has ordered the parties to also discuss whether the Wis. Stat. 182.0175(2), the Diggers Hotline statute, created a ministerial duty, or a duty to obey instructions with no room for discretion.

1:30 p.m. State v. Jeffrey Lepsch: A jury in 2013 convicted Jeffrey Lepsch of a double homicide in downtown La Crosse. He appealed the conviction, for which he is serving two life sentences, to the Court of Appeals, contending the jurors were improperly sworn-in outside his presence and that the jurors were subjectively and objectively biased. The Court of Appeals disagreed, and Lepsch asked the Supreme Court to review the case.

Nov. 10

9:45 a.m., State v. Thornton Talley: The case involves a defendant who was found to be sexually violent and committed in 2005. He later petitioned for discharge in 2011 and 2012. His first petition was denied by both the trial court and the District 4 Court of Appeals, and the high court declined to review his appeal. Talley is now appealing the trial court’s and district court’s denials of his petition from 2012.

10:45 a.m., Lela Operton v. LIRC: The Labor and Industry Review Commission is challenging an appeals court decision that found a former Walgreens clerk should not have been denied unemployment benefits because the mistakes she made at a cash register did not constitute substantial fault, a new standard by which benefits can be denied.