Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Case Digests/page 912

Case Digests

00-2359 State ex rel. Bogdanovich v. Town of Three Lakes Board of Supervisors

Anthony Bogdanovich appeals a judgment denying certiorari relief from the decision of the Town of Three Lakes Board of Supervisors that denied his application for construction of a road to his landlocked property. He argues that the board lacked discretion under Wis. Stat. sec. 80.131 to deny the application, that the record does not support the board’s decision and that ...

Read More »

00-3413 CK Witco Corp. v. Paper Allied Industrial, Chemical & Energy Workers International Union, Local 60-807, AFL-CIO

“Current Goldschmidt employees were once Witco employees and were covered by the CBA. Witco’s failure to maintain the ‘full force and effect’ of the CBA in the sale to Goldschmidt is an arbitrable violation for former Witco employees, regardless of the fact that they are currently employed by Goldschmidt. The claims relate to violations that occurred while they were Witco ...

Read More »

00-1138 Pangman, et al. v. King, et al.

Richard King appeals judgments entered in favor of Mary Schmitt and William Pangman on their claims against King for conversion and misrepresentation. King’s complaints are that the damages awarded by the jury were improper because the jury miscalculated the proper measure of damages and duplicated certain damages, and that Pangman and Schmitt were not entitled to recover on a conversion ...

Read More »

01-1635 Dixon v. Massanari

“Here, ALJ Kelly decided not to give Voss’ opinion controlling weight because she seriously doubted its credibility. We do not overturn an ALJ’s credibility determinations unless they are ‘patently wrong.’ See id. at 887. ALJ Kelly determined that Voss was not completely objective – that she gave Dixon the benefit of the doubt whenever possible. For example, Voss termed Dixon’s ...

Read More »

01-0838-CR State v. Garner

Terrance A. Garner appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of first-degree reckless homicide, while using a dangerous weapon, as party to a crime. He also appeals from an order denying his postconviction motion. Garner claims: (1) his brother’s affidavit constitutes newly discovered evidence warranting a new trial; (2) he was denied the opportunity to present ...

Read More »

00-2668 U.S. Freightways Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

“Even the Commissioner concedes the ordinariness of Freightways’ FLIP expenses for companies in the trucking business. Not only are they ordinary, but as Freightways points out, they recur, with clockwork regularity, every year. Both this court and the IRS have recognized this type of regularity as something that tends to support a finding of deductibility. See Encyclopedia Britannica, 685 F.2d ...

Read More »

00-2270-CR State v. Jackson

La’Shone Jackson appeals from a judgment of conviction. The issue is whether the court erred in denying his request for a continuance on the day of trial. We affirm. This opinion will not be published. Dist I, Milwaukee County, McMahon, J., Per Curiam Attorneys: For Appellant: Jeffrey W. Jensen, Milwaukee For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Diane M. Welsh, Madison

Read More »

00-2545 Vorhees v. Naper Aero Club Inc

“We agree with the defendants that the Illinois law claims Vorhees is trying to assert may very well be preempted by the Federal Aviation Act (though we make no ruling on that question at this time). But the fact that a federal statute creates a defense to a state law claim does not necessarily mean that ‘Congress has, by statute, ...

Read More »

99-2037 S.J.A.J. v. First Things First, Ltd. et al.

The court is equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the decision of the court of appeals, and the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed. Attorneys: For Appellant: James A. Pelish, Rice Lake For Respondent: Phillip M. Steans, Menomonie; Matthew A. Biegert, New Richmond

Read More »

00-2598-CR State v. Settles

Antonio Settles appeals a judgment of conviction and an order denying his postconviction motion. The issues are whether the circuit court erred by admitting certain evidence as an excited utterance, whether trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting when this evidence differed at trial from what was described before trial by the prosecutor and whether trial counsel was ineffective in ...

Read More »

00-3052 U.S. v. Walker

“It is clear that Walker was in physical pain (not many people find vomiting too comfortable). But whether the physical pain was so acute as to make his confession involuntary depends on the underlying facts of the situation. The district court chose to believe the testimony of the emergency room physician, who said that when Walker left the hospital, he ...

Read More »

00-3280, 00-3281, 00-3282, 00-3283, 00-3284 State v. Miller

Craig Miller, pro se, appeals orders of the circuit court rejecting his postconviction claims. Miller argues that his right to be free from double jeopardy was violated and that there was no factual basis for the bail jumping convictions. We affirm. This opinion will not be published. Dist IV, Dane County, Fiedler, J., Per Curiam Attorneys: For Appellant: Craig L. ...

Read More »

00-3377 State v. Rittenhouse

Jeffrey J. Rittenhouse appeals from orders denying his postconviction motions. He seeks to have his convictions dismissed based upon the denial of a speedy trial. In the alternative, he claims entitlement to withdraw his pleas of no contest to seven misdemeanor convictions because his counsel was ineffective in failing to litigate the illegal seizure and subsequent search of an automobile ...

Read More »

00-3393-CR State v. Gatewood

Larry Lamont Gatewood appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of two counts of kidnapping, three counts of first-degree sexual assault, and armed robbery, all as party to a crime. Gatewood claims: (1) his due process rights were violated when he was sentenced on inaccurate information relative to DNA evidence on two additional sexual assaults, but not ...

Read More »

01-0691-CR State v. Meddaugh

Timothy Meddaugh appeals a judgment convicting him of operating a motor vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration. Meddaugh challenges the denial of his motion to suppress the results of a chemical test of his blood. He contends that police should have obtained a search warrant before conducting the blood analysis. We conclude that, under Wisconsin’s Implied Consent Law, Meddaugh consented ...

Read More »

01-0310-CR State v. Costello

Shaun A. Costello appeals from a judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI), third offense. Costello argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the results of a blood test taken without a warrant. Costello argues that the blood test was unreasonable because he had submitted to a preliminary breath test and ...

Read More »

01-0586-CR State v. Richardson

Dennis L. Richardson appeals from an order denying his postconviction motion to modify his sentence. We affirm. Publication in the official reports is not recommended. Dist I, Milwaukee County, Moroney, J., Fine, J. Attorneys: For Appellant: Robert N. Meyeroff, Milwaukee For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Diane M. Welsh, Madison

Read More »

00-3497 Eller Media, Inc. v. State of Wisconsin Division of Hearings and Appeals

“Given Eller’s recognized leasehold interest, we conclude that Eller’s injury is to an interest that the law recognizes and seeks to protect. Having lost that interest by virtue of the administrative decision, Eller has suffered an actual injury to a protected interest. As such, Eller is an aggrieved party and has standing to petition for judicial review pursuant to Wis. ...

Read More »

00-0818-D In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Thomas E. Zablocki, Attorney at Law

“The referee, Michael Ash, concluded, and this court agrees, that by representing the wife in the bankruptcy case when his representation was directly adverse to the husband and when his representation of the wife was materially limited by his responsibility to the husband, without obtaining written consent from each client, Mr. Zablocki violated SCR 20:1.7(a) and (b); by failing to ...

Read More »

01-0327 Frost, by her Guardian Ad Litem v. Whitbeck

“Stated another way, by excluding the claims of only those resident relatives who are closely enough connected by blood or marriage to the policyholder that their relationships are likely to be considered in the policyholder’s personal decisions, such as contracting for homeowner’s insurance, claims that are essentially first-party claims are precluded. Additionally, defining ‘relative’ in an unlimited manner does not ...

Read More »

00-1429 Morrell v. Mock, et al.

“[W]e must balance the nature of the private interests at stake, the risk of harm from erroneous deprivations, and the government’s interests affected… We believe that the same considerations underlying the recognition of a parent’s due process right to pre-deprivation notice and hearing justify the requirement of pre-deprivation notice and some opportunity to object in the enforcing state, at least ...

Read More »

00-2144 Estate of Sarah M. Hegarty v. Beauchaine, et al.

“Section 893.55 clearly is the more specific of the two statutes. Unlike sec. 893.54, it concerns itself not only with injury to the person, but also with a particular way in which the injury arises, i.e., resulting from an act or omission of a ‘health care provider. “Thus, it is apparent that the legislature intended that any claim alleging negligence ...

Read More »

00-1354 McCoy v. Gilbert, et al.

“McCoy had notice of the new rule, and his reliance interests have not been unduly trammeled. We see no manifest injustice in telling a prisoner on a going-forward basis that he must work through and exhaust the administrative processes available to him, even if such exhaustion was optional under prior law. Congress has merely regulated future conduct without adjudicating the ...

Read More »

01-0154 Shoemaker v. KraftMaid Cabinetry Inc.

Susan Shoemaker appeals the circuit court’s order granting KraftMaid Cabinetry, Inc.’s motion to dismiss and the court’s judgment entered in favor of KraftMaid for costs. For the following reasons, we affirm. This opinion will not be published. Dist IV, Rock County, Welker, J., Lundsten, J. Attorneys: For Appellant: Susan B. Shoemaker, Edgerton For Respondent: Christine M. Witherill, Janesville

Read More »

00-4340 Midwestern Gas Transmission Company v. McCarty, et al.

“SIGECO is a local gas distribution company that has contracts with several pipelines, not including Midwestern. The pipelines do not sell gas themselves, they merely transport it, but they have affiliates that sell the gas they transport. The affiliates of the pipelines that supply SIGECO are in competition with the gas companies that sold the gas to the two Indiana ...

Read More »

00-2409 Fulghum v. General Motors Corporation

Robert H. Scheer and Susanne M. Fulghum appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict dismissing their products liability claim against the General Motors Corporation. They filed this claim after Scheer’s 1994 GMC Jimmy sports utility vehicle rolled over during an automobile accident. Scheer and Fulghum allege that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it prematurely terminated ...

Read More »

00-1759 DeVito v. Chicago Park District, et al.

“The doctrine of judicial estoppel is not strictly applicable here, because DeVito obtained benefits upon a claim of total disability without suing for them. But the cases we cited after ‘see also,’ together with our decision in Wilson v. Chrysler Corp., 172 F.3d 500, 504-05 (7th Cir. 1999), hold (with or without using the term ‘judicial estoppel’) that an ADA ...

Read More »

01-0368 In Re the Marriage of: Otte v. Otte

Yvonne Otte appeals from an order modifying her child support obligation and denying her motion to have Daniel Otte held in contempt for denying her physical placement of their son on “no school” days. Yvonne argues that she is entitled to support set according to the shared-time payer formula. We conclude that the circuit court properly exercised its discretion in ...

Read More »

00-4219 Curry v. Menard, Inc.

“Curry offered sufficient evidence to survive summary judgment because she established that two employees – Margaret Venetico and Anne Mercurio – had two or more cash discrepancies during Stanley’s tenure at the store but were neither suspended nor terminated. “For similar reasons we conclude that Curry presented sufficient evidence of pretext to preclude summary judgment. Menard’s proffered nondiscriminatory justification for ...

Read More »