High court to hear oral arguments in criminal, Fair Dealership Law cases

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court will tee off the oral argument it is scheduled to hear Wednesday with a dispute between the city of Madison and golf professionals working at some of its golf courses.

At issue in Benson v. City of Madison is whether the golf pros had a “dealership” with the city as laid out in Wisconsin’s Fair Dealership Law, which governs certain manufacturers and their dealers. That will be just the first of three cases scheduled to be heard Wednesday in the Supreme Court Hearing Room in the state Capitol.

The Benson case concerns agreements Madison had entered into with golf pros at four of golf courses that the public accesses through the city’s parks department. Under the agreements, the city maintained the golf courses while the pros operated the courses, including controlling use and access.

When the city decided not to renew the agreements, the pros sued, arguing that the Fair Dealership Law required the city to show there was good cause to terminate the agreements and give the pros proper notice.

So far, the golf professionals have not seen success with their arguments. Dane County Circuit Court Judge Richard Niess found the agreements were not governed by the Fair Dealership Law, and the state Court of Appeals agreed, noting that the city neither gave the pros the right to sell city goods and services nor the right to use a commercial symbol – a requirement stated in a previous decision from the high court.

The court will also hear two criminal cases Wednesday. The high court will begin the day with oral arguments in State v. Lewis, which involves a Kenosha who is pursuing an appeal after pleading no contest to two counts of possession with an intent to deliver a controlled substance stemming from a traffic stop.

At issue in the case is whether law enforcement properly extended the traffic stop and whether the man’s trial counsel provided deficient legal representation by failing to a call a witness.

The justices will end the day with State v. Asboth, an appeal from Dodge County involving whether a gun that law-enforcement officers found when searching a defendant’s car while it was impounded could be introduced into evidence in the burglary case against the defendant. The justices are expected to decide whether searching and impounding a vehicle is unconstitutional when the purpose of those procedures is to conduct a criminal investigation.