02-0513 State v. Schneck

Listen to this article

“We have no quarrel with Schneck’s analysis as far as it goes. However, it does not go far enough. Other case law establishes that the test for the application of the civil rules of procedure is not only whether the statutes governing the instant proceeding are silent on the matter or otherwise set out a different procedure, but also whether the instant proceeding can be reconciled with the rules of civil procedure. This was the approach taken by the trial court when it concluded that a Wis. Stat. ch. 345 forfeiture prosecution could not be reconciled with the summary judgment procedure set out in Wis. Stat. sec. 802.08. We agree. …

“Again, our comparative analysis of a Wis. Stat. ch. 345 procedure versus summary judgment procedure reveals that the two procedures are not only different but are inherently inconsistent. In short, summary judgment is unworkable in a ch. 345 forfeiture action.”

Affirmed.

Dist II, Waukesha County, Mawdsley, J., Nettesheim, P.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Mark A. Phillips, Brookfield

For Respondent: Kevin M. Osborne, Waukesha