Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / News/page 1190

News

00-3091 O'Neal v. City of New Albany, et al.

“[T]he record demonstrates that Dr. Pope had concluded that O’Neal passed the baseline statewide medical examination, and the defendants knew it. Dr. Pope checked the ‘no’ box next to each baseline condition listed in O’Neal’s 1977 fund application and signed that page of the form. Dr. Pope also signed a certification qualifying O’Neal to attend recruit school, which stated ‘as ...

Read More »

01-2126-CR State v. Konkol

Defendant was on trial for OWI; after the State rested, defendant asserted that he had consumed only one alcoholic drink at a local restaurant and therefore could not have had a blood alcohol concentration of .12. The prosecutor attempted to call an expert who would testify that it was impossible to reach .12 with one drink; the trial court refused ...

Read More »

01-394 Christopher v. Harbury

Harbury’s complaint did not come even close to stating a constitutional denial-of-access claim upon which relief could be granted. It did not identify the underlying cause of action that the alleged disruption had compromised, leaving the District Court and the defendants to guess as to the unstated action supposedly lost and at the remedy being sought independently of relief that ...

Read More »

01-2466 Scheiber v. Dolby Laboratories, Inc.

“[A]s we have pointed out, charging royalties beyond the term of the patent does not lengthen the patentee’s monopoly; it merely alters the timing of royalty payments. … However, we have no authority to overrule a Supreme Court decision no matter how dubious its reasoning strikes us. “In Aronson v. Quick Point Pencil Co., 440 U.S. 257 (1979), a case ...

Read More »

01-3214 Hribar Trucking Inc. v. HMB Contractors Inc.

HMB Contractors Inc. appeals from a judgment of the trial court in favor of Hribar Trucking Inc. in this small claims breach of contract action. HMB argues that the trial court erroneously determined that accord and satisfaction by use of a negotiable instrument did not apply to this contract dispute. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial court. ...

Read More »

01-714 Utah v. Evans

Utah argues that the words “actual Enumeration” require the Census Bureau to seek out each individual and prohibit it from relying on imputation, but the Constitution’s text does not make the distinction that Utah seeks to draw. Rather, it uses a general word, “enumeration,” that refers to a counting process without describing the count’s methodological details. The textual word “actual” ...

Read More »

01-1978 Eclipse Media Inc., et al. v. Quad/Creative Inc., et al.

Quad Creative Inc., Quad Creative LLC, and Quad Merger Inc. (collectively, Quad), appeal from the judgment entered after a jury found them liable to Eclipse Media Inc. (Eclipse) under the theories of breach of contract, quantum meruit, and promissory estoppel, and found Quad liable to Fred Eisenhauer and Mark Bosley on their claims of quantum meruit and promissory estoppel. Quad ...

Read More »

00-1021 Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran, et al.

The Illinois HMO Act is directed toward the insurance industry, and thus is an insurance regulation under a commonsense view. Although an HMO provides healthcare in addition to insurance, nothing in the saving clause requires an either-or choice between healthcare and insurance. Congress recognized, the year before passing ERISA, that HMOs are risk-bearing organizations subject to state insurance regulation. That ...

Read More »

01-1620 U.S. v. Abdulla

“[W]ithout deciding whether the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine can ever apply to a Miranda violation, we turn to whether Elstad’s underlying logic (a first confession that is voluntary, but that violates Miranda, will not bar the admission of a second voluntary confession) can apply to bar the use of the fruits doctrine… In determining whether Abdulla’s first confession ...

Read More »

01-3121, 01-3122, 01-3123, 01-3124, 01-3125 In Re the Paternity of Jared D.B., Hunter W., Kimberly L.N., Kayla L.H., Tanner D.F.: Barron County, Brenda F. v. Brian T.

Brian T. appeals an order setting the amount of child support for each of his five children. He argues that: (1) strict application of the percentage of income standards is unfair; (2) strict application of the percentage of income standards here conflicts with the Consumer Credit Protection Act; (3) the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by strictly applying the ...

Read More »

01-463 U.S. v. Fior D'Italia

The FICA statute’s language, taken as a whole, does not prevent using an aggregate estimation method. Fior D’Italia claims that, because sec. 3121(q) speaks in the singular – “tips received by an employee in the course of his employment” – an employer’s liability attaches to each individual payment, not when the payments are later summed and reported. However, sec. 3121(q) ...

Read More »

02-1315 U.S. v. Campbell

“Campbell’s motion did not request any relief from his criminal conviction or sentence-his motion requested only disclosure of what took place before the grand jury that indicted him. It was not an attack on the fact or duration of his confinement. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973) (‘the essence of habeas corpus is an attack by a ...

Read More »

02-0385-FT In Re the Marriage of: Jacoby v. Jacoby

William Jacoby appeals from a post-divorce order that replaced his limited-term family support obligation with a maintenance award of indefinite duration. He claims that the trial court erred by failing to find that a substantial change of circumstances had occurred, and erroneously exercised its discretion by relying solely on the length of the marriage and the disparity in the parties’ ...

Read More »

01-419 Columbus v. Ours Garage & Wrecker Service

Local governmental units are created to exercise such of the State’s powers as the State may entrust to them in its absolute discretion. Mortier, 501 U.S., at 607-608. In contrast to programs in which Congress restricts that discretion through its spending power, sec. 14501(c)(2)(A) evinces a clear purpose to ensure that the preemption of States’ economic authority over motor carriers ...

Read More »

01-2826, 01-2827 Curtis v. U.S.

“Because Apprendi is concerned with the identity of the decisionmaker, and the quantum of evidence required for a sentence, rather than with what primary conduct is unlawful, it identifies a new rule of criminal procedure that falls within the set of legal changes to which the Teague standard applies. “Thus we must ask whether the rights identified in Apprendi are ...

Read More »

02-0935, 02-0936 In re the Termination of Parental Rights to Frederick A.N. Jr., Queen A.M.N.: State v. Frederick N.

Frederick N., Sr., appeals from an order terminating his parental rights to Frederick A.N. Jr., and Queen Adella Marie N., entered on the trial court’s finding that he was in default. We reverse. This opinion will not be published. Dist I, Milwaukee County, Murray, J., Fine, J. Attorneys: For Appellant: Jeffrey W. Jensen, Milwaukee For Respondent: Phyllis M. DeCarvalho, Milwaukee

Read More »

01-301 Carey v. Saffold

A contrary reading is not consistent with the ordinary meaning of “pending,” which, in the present context, means until the completion of the collateral review process; i.e., until the application has achieved final resolution through the State’s postconviction proceedings. Petitioner’s reading would also produce a serious statutory anomaly. Because a federal habeas petitioner has not exhausted his state remedies as ...

Read More »

01-3954 U.S. v. Travis

“Here the district court did not cite Mr. Travis’ obstructive conduct as the basis for denying an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility. Instead, the district court denied the adjustment because Mr. Travis downplayed the illegality of his operation of Maple Investments during a presentence interview held after he pleaded guilty in connection with the Maple Investments scam. Mr. Travis told ...

Read More »

01-3172, 01-3173 In the Interest of Jeffrey A.T.: State v. Jeffrey A.T.

Jeffrey A.T. appeals from a juvenile court dispositional order adjudging him delinquent of one count of first-degree sexual assault of a child and one count of fourth-degree sexual assault, and from an order denying postdispositional relief. Jeffrey argues: (1) the dispositional order is based upon a recommendation made in violation of § 938.33 because the court report did not include ...

Read More »

01-631 U.S. v. Drayton

Applying Bostick’s framework to this case demonstrates that the police did not seize respondents. The officers gave the passengers no reason to believe that they were required to answer questions. When Lang approached respondents, he did not brandish a weapon or make any intimidating movements. He left the aisle free so that respondents could exit. He spoke to passengers one ...

Read More »

01-4241 U.S. v. Morris

“[T]he two offenses committed by Morris, although close in time and location, involved distinct criminal aggressions from which he had an opportunity to cease and withdraw. The facts underlying the offenses are not in dispute. Morris shot at victim Derek Kye from his automobile at the corner of 17th and Pine, and then drove away. Kye then ran to his ...

Read More »

01-2622 Kinderman, et al. v. The Village of Redgranite

The Village of Redgranite appeals an order denying its motion for summary judgment. A group of business owners sued the Village after the Village removed parking spaces from a downtown business district. We conclude that the Village is entitled to summary judgment, and therefore reverse the order of the circuit court and remand with instructions to grant summary judgment in ...

Read More »

01-3882, 01-4326 Ehorn v. Sunken Vessel Known as the "Rosinco"

“We need not determine whether the district court abused its discretion in declining to accept an untimely answer-a subject on which Alter Barge may be a ticket good for one ride only, see 272 F.3d at 398 (‘[w]e limit our holding to the facts of this case’)-because the state was entitled to withhold an answer until it had been served. ...

Read More »

00-1100 Split Rock Hardwoods Inc. v. Lumber Liquidators Inc.

“If and when a court is called upon to determine whether an answer has been filed “within a reasonable time after service,” the court should focus on the length of time between service and filing that allegedly amounts to unreasonable delay. The court should examine whether there are any factual circumstances that explain the delay, such as a problem with ...

Read More »

01-2999 Fanello, et al. v. Weisenberger, et al.

David Fanello and Shelly Weeth appeal a summary judgment dismissing their negligence action against Trempealeau County and Sheriff Ralph Weisenberger. The trial court concluded that the County and sheriff are immune from suit under Wis. Stat. sec. 893.80(4). Fanello and Weeth argue that the County coroner’s and sheriff’s negligent failure to find a portion of their son’s skull that was ...

Read More »

01-3565 In re High Fructose Corn Syrup Antitrust Litigation

“We shall now summarize the evidence of explicit agreement, first noting however that the district judge refused to consider any of this evidence because he thought its character was such as to ‘require that a substantial inference be drawn in order to have evidentiary significance.’ This is correct in the sense that no single piece of the evidence that we’re ...

Read More »

01-1025 Jones v. Jones

Mary Ann and Robert signed a prenuptial agreement as described; Robert owned the home where they lived as individual property; Robert then deeded it to Mary Ann, who deeded it that same day to Robert’s adult sons (retaining a life estate for the life of Robert plus one year); Robert died and Mary Ann now seeks to invalidate her deed ...

Read More »

01-3158-CR State v. Seaman

Timothy J. Seaman challenges the circuit court’s denial of his motion to suppress. He maintains that the arresting officer did not have a reasonable and articulable basis for initiating an investigative stop. While we agree with Seaman that his driving could have an innocent explanation, we affirm the circuit court given that a reasonable inference of unlawful conduct can be ...

Read More »

01-3532 Florian v. Sequa Corp., et al.

“This is a procedurally botched appeal; we are publishing our decision in an effort to head off a repetition of the problem that gave rise to the botch… The district court entered judgment in favor of the defendants. Within 10 days, the plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider so much of the judgment as dismissed the state law claims. That ...

Read More »