High court, lawmakers release dueling overhauls of state class-action rule

Listen to this article

The same day the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an order adopting a new class-action rule, lawmakers introduced legislation calling for their own overhaul of the rule.

The court on Dec. 21 issued an order formally adopting changes to the class-action rule repealing the state’s statute governing class actions and replacing it with language from the comparable federal rule. The order is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2018.

The proposal for the rule was filed in March by the Wisconsin Judicial Council, a 21-member independent body made up of judges, lawyers and lawmakers who study and recommend changes to the state’s rules of procedure and evidence.

The court voted in closed conference in November to approve the council’s proposal after a public hearing.

Now another revision of the class-action rule is before the state Legislature. The same day the court issued its order, lawmakers introduced Senate Bill 645, which would, among other things, make further revisions to the state’s class-action rule.

The bill differs from the court’s version in two ways: It would add a fifth criteria that would have to be met for class certification and would allow immediate mandatory appeals of class-certification orders. Filing for an appeal of that sort would stay all proceedings in a case.

The bill has been assigned to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety. Its assembly counterpart, Assembly Bill 773, has been assigned to the Committee on Judiciary. Public hearings have yet to be scheduled for both bills. The organizations that have registered in favor of the bill are Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, Independent Insurance Agents of Wisconsin, Midwest Food Products Association, Wisconsin Builders Association, Wisconsin Insurance Alliance and Wisconsin Economic Development Association.

The Wisconsin Association for Justice, which represents the state’s plaintiff’s attorneys, is so far the only lobbying organization that has registered in opposition to the bills, although it noted it could take a neutral stance should certain changes be adopted.

The court on Dec. 21 also issued an order formally adopting some tweaks to the judicial education rules for municipal judges.

The current rules require newly elected municipal judges to attend an orientation institute as soon as possible following their election. Judges must also earn at least four education credits at an orientation, review or graduate institute in each 365-day period after their term begins, unless they hold office for less than five months during a calendar year.

The changes proposed by the Office of Judicial Education would have the rule apply to appointed municipal judges, require those judges to start judicial education in their first year in office and to make the judicial education calendar for municipal judges consistent with the calendar year.

The justices voted to approve the changes in June. They gave their approval without first holding a public hearing, contending they were only make a technical tweak. The changes will now take effect Jan. 1. Follow @erikastrebel