By: dmc-admin//July 9, 2001//
We reject the third-party buyer’s claim that under Wis. Stat. sec. 808.07(1) the option-holders were required to obtain a stay pending appeal in order to preserve the status quo after the circuit court entered judgment.
Further, we find that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion in denying the option-holder’s request for specific performance; we remand for entry of an order granting specific performance.
We discuss at length: 1) lis pendens as a general matter, 2) common law lis pendens, 3) statutory lis pendens, and 4) what remains of common law lis pendens in Wisconsin in light of the creation of Wis. Stat. sec. 840.10.
Reversed and remanded.
Review of a Decision of the Court of Appeals, Bablitch, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Joseph C. Niebler, Brookfield
For Respondent: E. Joseph Kershek, Milwaukee