By: Derek Hawkins//June 29, 2016//
WI Court of Appeals – District I
Case Name: Ralph Sasson v. Stephen Kravit, et al
Case No.: 2015AP618
Officials: Kessler, Brennan and Brash, JJ.
Focus: Court Error – Abuse of Discretion
Sasson appeals, arguing that: (1) the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because his claims were legally sufficient and material factual disputes existed; (2) the trial court misused its discretion in finding Sasson made a judicial admission when he agreed on the record that he had been found in contempt; (3) the trial court erred in finding Sasson’s claims to be barred by the doctrine of issue preclusion; (4) the trial court erred in finding he had engaged in a pattern of frivolous litigation and in finding Sasson’s claims to be frivolous in this case; and (5) the trial court misused its discretion in viewing Sasson’s motion for relief from judgment as a motion for reconsideration. We agree with the trial court and affirm. We conclude that each of Sasson’s claims here is based on faulty factual and legal premises, namely, Sasson’s arguments that: (1) he was never subject to a “standing seal order” in the first lawsuit prohibiting him from releasing the deposition; and (2) he was never found in contempt in the first lawsuit for releasing the deposition, and even if he was found in contempt, he should not have been. Because the record is clear that Sasson was found in contempt in the first lawsuit and never appealed the contempt finding, we need not revisit that issue. And because our decision in Sasson I clearly established that he was subject to the “standing seal order” in the first lawsuit and properly sanctioned with the dismissal of all claims as a sanction for his egregious conduct and bad faith, we need not (and cannot) revisit that issue. See Cirilli v. Country Ins. & Fin. Servs., 2013 WI App 44, ¶8, 347 Wis. 2d 481, 830 N.W.2d 234 (citation omitted) (issue preclusion prevents relitigation of issues that have actually been litigated in a prior proceeding).