Wisconsin Law Journal – WI Legal News & Resources Wisconsin Legal News & Resources

A recent Wisconsin Law Journal article questioned the necessity of the Wisconsin Supreme Court rule allowing citation of certain unpublished cases.

A Connecticut judge recently ordered a divorcing couple to share their Facebook and other online social media passwords.

Listening to oral arguments is generally frustrating for me.

Recently, New York became the sixth and largest state to recognize same-sex marriage. If the current trend continues, more and more states will legalize it.

On July 12, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued its opinion in McReath v. McReath, involving the challenging issues of saleable goodwill and double-counting of property and income.

When the Wisconsin Supreme Court chose to accept review of Topolski v. Topolski, No. 2009AP2433, I wondered why, especially after the court had rejected review of several family law cases where its input would’ve been useful.

A few years ago, it appeared that collaborative divorce, and its cousin, cooperative divorce, would be the "new thing," revolutionizing the practice of divorce in Wisconsin.

One of Gov. Scott Walker’s first accomplishments in office was to sign 2011 Wis. Act 2, adopting the Daubert rule for admission of expert testimony.

University of Wisconsin law professor John Nicholas Schweitzer wants to amend ethics rules by, among other changes, eliminating the prohibition of charging a contingent fee in most family law cases.

Could it be that our Supreme Court, which has gone over two years without deciding a single significant family law case, could have not one, but two such cases before it in the present term? Am I dreaming?

Unfortunately, in the past two years, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has denied review of two significant maintenance cases ordered published by the Court of Appeals.

There's an old joke about a husband not wanting to pay his wife any maintenance. The judge, after hearing the evidence, finds she is entitled to support and says, "I'm going to give her $1,000 per month." The husband responds, "Damn nice of you, judge. I'll kick in a couple hundred bucks of my own."

Periodically in this column, I have suggested that the Wisconsin Supreme Court accept review on a family law case decided by the Court of Appeals.

Last year in this column, I raised the question of whether the costs for violating a court order, including attorney fees, would constitute “continuing contempt” in order to assure that a victim would be made whole. (“When is Contempt Continuing?” Wisconsin Law Journal, Aug. 24, 2009.) While not directly addressing the issue of continuing contempt, a recent decision by the ...

Every once in a while, it seems, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals needs to remind trial courts that family-law cases are really lawsuits. While they differ from other areas of law in certain ways, namely the familiarity of the parties with each other, they are still court proceedings and as a result, certain rules apply — such as court orders ...

Gregg Herman Over the past few weeks, this column has examined the relationship between family law attorneys and mental health professionals. We have examined the issues from the perspective of studies of family law processes and of the use of mental health professionals in the legal process. Now, how can lawyers and mental health professionals work together in the future ...