Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Juveniles – TPR — stipulations

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 8, 2013//

Juveniles – TPR — stipulations

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 8, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Juveniles – TPR — stipulations

A parent’s stipulation waiving her appeal rights in a TPR proceeding is enforceable.

“When Alexis and Ronald decided to enter into a stipulation rather than go to trial, they both had to assess the costs and benefits of that decision just as would any civil litigant. Although one statutory ground for unfitness had been decided at summary judgment, a trial was looming on the second where the facts were disputed and summary judgment was not the appropriate vehicle for resolution. While Alexis’s motivation for entering into the bargain is not explicitly stated, we can surmise that a trial on her alleged failure to assume parental responsibility would have been unpleasant for her, given that she would have had to listen to testimony regarding her significant drug-related problems that Ronald claimed had resulted in a lack of relationship with her child. In addition, a finding of unfitness based on a failure to assume parental responsibility could have had a negative impact on the trial court’s impression of Alexis and her relationship with her son at the dispositional hearing. For whatever reason, Alexis felt that it was to her benefit to enter into the stipulation rather than go to trial. That decision came with a cost, but she signed it, which tells us she thought the cost was worth it. The fact that she now regrets her bargain because her appellate attorney has thought of arguments neither she nor her trial attorney considered before the stipulation was signed is not a ‘mistake.’ If anything, it is hindsight. But hindsight does not make a stipulation invalid under either Johnson or WIS. STAT. § 806.07(1).”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2012AP1300 Ronald J.R. v. Alexis L.A.

Dist. II, Waukesha County, Bohren, J., Brown, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Findley, Brian C., Darlington; For Respondent: Phelps, Nancy, Milwaukee; Binder, William M., Milwaukee

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests