Quantcast
Home / Case Digests (page 754) /

Case Digests

00-2522 Townsend v. Vallas

“In Mr. Townsend’s case, however, the Board only temporarily transferred him from his teaching position, pending an investigation regarding the death of a child, and it provided Mr. Townsend with his full teacher’s salary while it did so. Within two ...

Read More »

00-2827 Equity Enterprises, Inc. v. Milosch

“Therefore, because section 5.1 does not contain any geographical restrictions, section 5.1 fails and the jury finding that it was reasonable is an error of law.” In addition, we conclude that the stipulated damages clause of the contract, sec. 4.2, ...

Read More »

00-4145 Delany v. DeTella, et al.

“Here, both in duration and severity, the nature of Delaney’s alleged deprivation was significant and serious, and apparently no alternatives were made available to mitigate the effects of the deprivation. We recently noted that segregation is akin to solitary confinement ...

Read More »

00-0003 Reid v. Benz

“In Elliott [v. Donahue, 169 Wis.2d 310 (1992)] we clearly stated that the proper procedure for an insurance company to follow when coverage is disputed is to request a bifurcated trial on the issues of coverage and liability and move ...

Read More »

98-2162 Green v. Smith & Nephew, AHP

“In Vincer v. Esther Williams All-Aluminum Swimming Pool Co., 69 Wis.2d 326(1975), this court adopted Comment g to sec. 402A, which provides that a product is defective ‘where the product is, at the time it leaves the seller’s hands, in ...

Read More »

99-0380 Koffman v. Leichtfuss

“The plaintiff contends that he is nonetheless entitled to seek the reasonable value of medical services rendered. He maintains that the collateral source rule renders irrelevant any payments made by his insurers. The defendants seek to limit the medical expenses ...

Read More »

99-0743 State v. Franklin

“We find nothing in Hansford to support the conclusion that the difference between a six-person jury trial and a twelve-person jury trial is so fundamental that a six-person jury trial, which was conducted without objection under the express authority of ...

Read More »

00-4064 U.S. v. Gochis

“In this case, there is no indication that Gochis has suffered any prejudice as a result of the magistrate judge’s failure to admonish him about his right to a trial before a district judge. His primary concern was to have ...

Read More »

00-1718 State v. Leitner

“The trial court properly denied the motion because it was not supported by a preponderance of evidence showing that Leitner actually had an alibi witness which he had previously chosen to conceal. At the hearing on his motion to withdraw ...

Read More »

99-2704 State v. Lindell

“Because our decision to affirm Lindell’s conviction is at odds with State v. Ramos, 211 Wis.2d 12, 564 N.W.2d 328 (1997), which would have required an automatic reversal in any situation where the defendant used a peremptory strike to remove ...

Read More »

00-3835 U.S. v. Hemmings

“While Hemmings seeks relief under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3162(a) (1), it is clear from the plain language of the statute that his claim must fail. Section 3162(a)(1) provides: ‘If, in the case of any individual against whom a complaint is ...

Read More »

99-3328 State v. Oakley

“The effects of the nonpayment of child support on our children are particularly troubling. In addition to engendering long-term consequences such as poor health, behavioral problems, delinquency and low educational attainment, inadequate child support is a direct contributor to childhood ...

Read More »

01-1159 Piaskowski v. Bett

“The State’s meager circumstantial evidence against Piaskowski is also innocuous. The fact that Piaskowski was present in coop 9 prior to the beating and entered coop 7 after the beating, 2 or 3 minutes after Kutska and Moore, proves little ...

Read More »

99-3040 State ex rel. Kaminski v. Schwarz

“We cannot agree that the legislature intended to prohibit notification of potentially vulnerable persons; nothing in the language of the statutes or in the legislative history supports such a conclusion. Such a conclusion would invalidate the notice in rule 16-3 ...

Read More »

00-2854 Tezak v. U.S.

“[C]onflicting testimony was presented about the filing of an appeal. The district court did not credit Casey’s deposition testimony, which the court stated indicated a bias against Popuch on Casey’s part due to the check forgery. Also, given Tezak’s vocal ...

Read More »

99-1069 Neff v. Pierzina

“[T]he determination whether an insurer has been prejudiced by the lack of timely notice is essentially a question of fact. The fact finder’s determination should not be set aside unless it is clearly erroneous. Wis. Stat. sec. 805.17(2). Wisconsin Stat. ...

Read More »

98-2595-CR State v. Eason

“In the 17 years since Leon became law, there is no evidence here, and none has been offered, that the good faith exception has given rise to increased police abuse or oppression… [W]e find that Article I, Section 11 of ...

Read More »

00-3090 U. S. v. Espinoza

“Given Espinoza’s resistive physical response to the officers’ attempt to gain forcible entry into his home (holding the door shut to prevent the officers from entering) we fail to see how the officers’ alleged failure to wait an objectively reasonable ...

Read More »

99-2296-CR State v. Henderson

“The rule against ‘rehabilitating’ a warrant after-the-fact by information known to the police but not included in the warrant application… applies only to challenges to the sufficiency of a search warrant under the warrant clause, not challenges to the manner ...

Read More »

00-1992 Herlache v. Zahran, et al.

Robin and Karen Zahran have appealed pro se from an order entered in the trial court on June 20, 2000, establishing the amount to be paid by them for the redemption of property which was the subject of a sheriff’s ...

Read More »