Quantcast
Home / News (page 1006) /

News

00-2942 In Re the Marriage of: Sorensen v. Sorensen

Philip Sorensen appeals his divorce judgment and challenges child support, maintenance, property division and attorney fees. His former wife, Elaine Sorensen, cross-appeals, challenging maintenance, the allocation of debts, and the award of attorney fees. We affirm the judgment. This opinion ...

Read More »

00-2172 Harris v. City of Chicago, et al.

“[D]efendants’ contention that Ramos was willing to speak freely at the Sept. 28, 1998 deposition is belied by the fact that, at that deposition, Ramos invoked the Fifth Amendment in response to several general questions which could not possibly have ...

Read More »

99-3017 Stanciel v. Gramley, et al.

“Stanciel has presented an argument that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing defendants Lowery, Kelly, and Reider for lack of timely service. He claims the district court erred by invoking Local Rule 7.1(B) to dismiss defendants for improper ...

Read More »

00-2721 Biesterveld v. Roob

Mark Roob appeals from a default judgment in favor of Scott and Cindy Biesterveld. Roob is a professional photographer and photographed the Biestervelds’ wedding. Their complaint alleged that he breached a contract for the pictures, violated various provisions of Wisconsin’s ...

Read More »

01-0752-CR State v. Chenal

Craig Chenal was involved in a break-in of an abandoned house owned by the estate of Morris White. The State appeals an order that Chenal owed no restitution as a result of his conviction for misdemeanor theft, party to a ...

Read More »

00-3047 Heritage Mutual Insurance Company v. Janda

Richard and Colleen Janda appeal an order granting summary judgment to Heritage Mutual Insurance Company. The order precludes the Jandas from pursuing an uninsured motorist claim under their Heritage policy for personal injuries they sustained while riding their uninsured motorcycle. ...

Read More »

01-0736-CR State v. Malkmus

Gary Malkmus appeals from an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He also appeals from an order denying his motion for sentence credit. We affirm the orders of the trial court. This opinion will not be published. Dist II, ...

Read More »

00-2719 Hein, et al. v. Frieberg, et al.

Jerome and Judith Hein appeal from a judgment declaring that a homeowners insurance policy issued to Thomas Frieberg did not provide coverage for Jerome’s injuries resulting from an automobile accident allegedly caused by Frieberg’s minor daughter. They contend the trial ...

Read More »

01-0194 Jones v. Secura Insurance

Harold Jones appeals an order declaring that Stacie Jones, his daughter, is not covered by an automobile insurance policy issued to Jones Transportation, his business. The issue is whether the trial court correctly concluded that the policy did not provide ...

Read More »

01-1438-NM, 01-1439-NM In Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Maryah Monika M., Dante Jovan M.: Brown County Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Antonio M., et al.

Tisa C. appeals orders terminating her parental rights to her two children and orders denying her post-termination motions. Tisa challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s finding beyond a reasonable doubt of the likelihood of serious emotional or ...

Read More »

00-1523, 00-2679 U.S. v. Bhutani

“While the plain language of the FDCA clearly prohibited the failure to establish or maintain records, criminal penalties were not clearly imposed. Nevertheless, we agree with the reasoning found in the former set of cases rather than the latter because ...

Read More »

01-1054-CR State v. Arnold

The State appeals an order suppressing incriminating statements that David Arnold made to police. The State argues that (1) Arnold was not in custody when he made the statements, and (2) Arnold’s statements were voluntary because the police used no ...

Read More »

01-1733 Ashley v. U.S.

“The district court dismissed Ashley’s petition as untimely without reaching a conclusion about whether Apprendi applies retroactively to collateral attacks. We therefore issue a certificate of appealability, for given Apprendi the underlying constitutional claim must be deemed ‘substantial’ for purposes ...

Read More »

00-2874-CR State v. Cucuta

Manuel Cucuta appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of two counts of first-degree intentional homicide, party to a crime, and one count of use of a dangerous weapon. Cucuta also appeals from the trial court’s order ...

Read More »

01-2006 Ruth v. U.S.

“Ruth asserted in his Rule 33 motion that his new evidence of Countryside Fragrances’s legitimate and independent existence supported his claim of innocence. He did not argue that the government violated Brady by failing to disclose this information, nor did ...

Read More »

00-2897-CR State v. Spiller

Jerjuan D. Spiller appeals from a judgment of conviction and an order denying postconviction relief after a jury found him guilty of: two counts of kidnapping, two counts of first-degree sexual assault, two counts of armed robbery, and exposing a ...

Read More »

00-3288-CR State v. Bintz

David Bintz appeals a judgment of conviction for first-degree murder, party to a crime, and an order denying postconviction relief. Bintz argues that (1) the trial court erred by admitting “sleep talk” evidence; (2) the court erred by refusing to ...

Read More »

01-1020-FT City of Stevens Point v. Wirtz

Michael C. Wirtz appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty under Wis. Stat. sec. 346.63(1)(a) for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant. Wirtz contends on appeal that the trial court erred in refusing to ...

Read More »

01-0684-CR State v. Sekula

Joanne Sekula appeals from a judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant (OWI), and from an order denying her motion for an evidentiary hearing on whether her trial counsel was ineffective for ...

Read More »

00-3176 State v. Hughes

This is so because, “the jury’s unanimous findings (confirmed when the trial court polled the jury) that Hughes possessed cocaine with the intent to deliver it, and that he also possessed that cocaine were not inconsistent. Additionally, Hughes does not ...

Read More »