By: dmc-admin//June 25, 2001//
“In sum, in view of the current state of the record, we conclude that the Johnsons have presented claims upon which relief may be granted. The record is insufficient for us to determine whether public policy considerations bar the Johnsons’ claims. Further, the factual record is insufficient for us to determine whether the statute of limitations bars the Johnsons’ claim against RMH. As a result, we reverse the court of appeals’ decision, which upheld the circuit court’s dismissal of the complaint.”
Reversed and remanded.
Court of Appeals; Bablitch, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: William Smoler, Madison; Gregory P. Seibold, Madison
For Respondent: Lori Gendelman, Jeffrey J.P. Conta, Milwaukee