Quantcast
Home / Case Digests (page 865) /

Case Digests

99-7791 & 00-38 Zadvydas v. Davis

“We have found nothing in the history of these statutes that clearly demonstrates a congressional intent to authorize indefinite, perhaps permanent, detention. Consequently, interpreting the statute to avoid a serious constitutional threat, we conclude that, once removal is no longer ...

Read More »

99-1155 EEOC v. Indiana Bell Telephone Co.

“Ameritech contends that the 30-day, just-cause, and arbitration provisions of the collective bargaining agreement demonstrate that its actions were reasonable, and thus that Amos’s misconduct should not be attributed to the employer. … It did not take Ameritech’s managers long ...

Read More »

99-1319 Batteries Plus, LLC v. Mohr

“The statute speaks of prohibiting a deduction from wages due or earned unless: (1) the employee authorizes the employer in writing to make such a deduction; or (2) the employee and a representative of the employer determine that the ‘loss’ ...

Read More »

00-0752-CR State v. Ledford

William Ledford appeals a judgment of the circuit court convicting him of perjury based on his testimony during the preliminary hearing for charges against Raul Rodriguez and requiring Ledford to reimburse Dodge County for the cost of his third court-appointed ...

Read More »

99-2803 State v. T.J. International Inc.

Accordingly, we affirm the court of appeals’ reversal of the judgment of the circuit court. Defendant Norco sold its window plant to defendant Jeld-Wen. There was no interruption of business, and Jeld-Wen hired all but 47 of Norco’s 396 employees ...

Read More »

00-0931 Spencer v. Society Insurance, et al.

Patricia Spencer appeals from a personal injury judgment based on several alleged evidentiary errors. Regal Insurance cross-appeals the trial court’s decision to grant Spencer’s attorney a lien on the judgment superior to Regal’s own medical payments lien. We conclude that ...

Read More »

00-3746 Emerson v. Northern States Power Co.

“An employee is not a qualified individual if she poses ‘a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation.’ 42 U.S.C. sec. 12111(3). “NSP presented unchallenged doctors’ opinions that Emerson suffered from ...

Read More »

99-1994 Nevada v. Hicks

“Tribal courts, it should be clear, cannot be courts of general jurisdiction in this sense, for a tribe’s inherent adjudicative jurisdiction over nonmembers is at most only as broad as its legislative jurisdiction. … It is true that some statutes ...

Read More »

00-1870-CR State v. Ball

Barry L. Ball appeals from a judgment convicting him of disorderly conduct, in which the trial court ordered him to make restitution to a prison worker who was injured while attempting to break up a fight between Ball and another ...

Read More »

00-1910 State v. Williams

Shulbert Z. Williams, pro se, appeals from an order denying his Wis. Stat. sec. 974.06 (1999-2000) motion for postconviction relief. He argues that postconviction counsel was ineffective for failing to pursue the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We affirm. This ...

Read More »

98-3021 Paulman v. Pemberton

Defendant’s conversion of his mother’s property is not merely an assumption; it is a fact he conceded in the trial court. As part of the settlement stipulation, he agreed that if he failed to meet the stipulation’s terms, the trial ...

Read More »

00-2934 Stroe v. INS

“The Board held that the Stroes in moving to reopen the deportation proceeding on the basis of Adkison’s alleged ineffective assistance had satisfied (1), but not (2) or (3). Regarding (2), the Stroes had notified Adkison with regard to his ...

Read More »

99-1734-CR State v. Dismuke

Defendant was on parole when he was charged with armed robbery and possession of a firearm by a felon. His parole was revoked, and he was sent to prison to begin serving the remainder of his sentence on the parole ...

Read More »

00-5961 Tyler v. Cain

“The only way the Supreme Court can, by itself, ‘lay out and construct’ a rule’s retroactive effect, or ’cause’ that effect ‘to exist, occur, or appear,’ is through a holding. The Supreme Court does not ‘ma[k]e’ a rule retroactive when ...

Read More »

00-2059-CR State v. Craig

Darnial C. Craig appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him, and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He argues on appeal that he was denied due process of law because the prosecutor referred to a sexual ...

Read More »

00-2720-CR State v. Myren

This is an appeal from a judgment convicting Ronald Myren of one count of stalking and two counts of disorderly conduct, and from and order denying sentence credit. Ronald Myren raises sufficiency of evidence, other acts evidence, and sentence credit ...

Read More »

99-2234 State v. Trawitzki

“As both parties concede, the charges are identical in law because they arise under the same criminal statute, sec. 943.20(1)(a). However, the charges against Trawitzki are not identical in fact. The test for whether charges are not identical in fact ...

Read More »

00-2984 Kavelaris v. MSI Ins. Co.

The trial court denied CGLI’s subrogation claim because Kavelaris would not totally recover his full damages under Wisconsin’s “made whole” doctrine if the CGLI subrogation claim prevailed. We affirm the trial court order denying the CGLI subrogation claim and the ...

Read More »

00-3345-CR State v. Jones

Charles Jones appeals from a judgment entered on jury verdict convicting him of battery, and bail jumping, stemming from his violation of a no-contact order, both as an habitual criminal, and from the trial court’s order denying his motion for ...

Read More »

99-3142-CR State v. Hanson

However, given the state of the record, we cannot determine whether defendant’s driving record supported a criminal sentence even without consideration of his HTO status. We reverse the decision of the court of appeals and remand to the circuit court ...

Read More »

93-C-0547 Jeanine B. v. McCallum, et al.

“The Court’s task will be to determine whether the defendants have ‘timely filed a petition to terminate parental rights and begun the required search for an adoptive family, or elected not to file and documented one of the clearly defined ...

Read More »