Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / News/page 1223

News

01-2052, 01-2053, 01-2054, 01-2055 I Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Savannah S., Jacob S., Felicia S., Sasha S.: Langlade County v. Janet S., Eugene S.

Janet S. and Eugene S. appeal from orders terminating their parental rights to their children. They argue that: (1) the evidence introduced at the fact-finding hearing was insufficient to establish that the Langlade County Human Services Department made diligent efforts to provide the services ordered by the trial court; (2) the trial court erred by instructing the jury to disregard ...

Read More »

01-1361 Bennington v. Caterpillar, Inc.

“In cases where the age difference between the plaintiff and the individual treated more favorably is less than ten years, ‘the plaintiff still may present a triable claim if [he] directs the court to evidence that [his] employer considered [his] age to be significant.’ Id. Bennington has not presented any evidence that Caterpillar’s decisions affecting his employment were motivated by ...

Read More »

01-1104 Flores, et al. v. Raz

“Here, it is clear that everyone knew that Board approval was necessary. Indeed, the parties met with the executive director, who encouraged the sale. The facts and circumstances point to the parties’ intention that Board approval would be necessary to complete the sale. Thus, the Board’s approval was an implied condition precedent to enforcement of the contract.” And, where the ...

Read More »

01-1829-FT Olsen's Mill Inc. v. Portage County Wisconsin Board of Adjustment, et al.

Olsen’s Mill appeals a circuit court order affirming a decision by the Portage County Board of Adjustment on certiorari review. The issue is whether the board exceeded its authority when it modified a condition attached to a special exception permit to allow the Town of Stockton to use a letter of credit provided by Olsen’s Mill for the construction of ...

Read More »

00-2414 Worth v. Tyer, et al.

“[T]he EEOC sent Worth a right-to-sue letter on October 21, 1996. Thus, defendants could have sought to dismiss Worth’s complaint at any time before October 21… However, it was defendants’ duty to bring any deficiency in Worth’s complaint to the court’s attention and they failed to do so in a timely manner. Therefore, defendants’ argument fails because it was not ...

Read More »

00-3430 Ag Services of America, Inc. v. Krejchik, et al.

“We find persuasive the following language of the Colorado Court of Appeals: ‘In the intricate and complicated business of banking, absolute exactness and particularity in regard to names is absolutely indispensable, not only for the security of the bank, but of those doing business with it.’ German Nat’l Bank, 39 P. at 72. The Colorado court went on to opine ...

Read More »

00-3421 Town of Windsor v. Village of DeForest, et al.

The Town of Windsor appeals orders dismissing its challenge to annexation of 234 acres of its land by the Village of DeForest. The land is part of 723 acres owned by ACATT Holding Corporation, formerly ABS Global Inc. (ABS). The parties had previously agreed that DeForest would limit its annexation to the other 489 acres of ABS’s land. However, ABS ...

Read More »

00-1860 Bloedorn v. Francisco Foods, Inc.

“Given the nature of the unfair labor practices charged in this case and the evidence supporting the Director’s allegations, interim relief would serve the public interest. If, as the Director alleges, FFI deliberately displaced the Union by refusing to hire RSI employees it otherwise would have hired, it committed violations that strike at the heart of the collective bargaining process. ...

Read More »

01-1088 State v. Carlson

“The plain language of Wis. Stat. § 978.045 authorizes two distinct ways in which a court may appoint a special prosecutor. This is signified by the use of the word ‘or.’ Subsection (1g) states that a court may appoint a special prosecutor either on its own motion ‘or’ when a district attorney makes a request that the court do so. ...

Read More »

01-0520-CR State v. Anderson

Maxine Anderson appeals from a judgment convicting her of child abuse and first-degree reckless homicide. On appeal, she argues that she was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s improper cross-examination of her, the circuit court should have granted her motion for a mistrial due to the prosecutor’s conduct, and the prosecutor’s conduct deprived her of her right to due process. We reject ...

Read More »

01-0231 VanCleve v. City of Marinette

“The statute states that if the damages are caused by the wrong of the City ‘and of any person, or private corporation, such person or private corporation shall be primarily liable therefor.’ Wis. Stat. § 81.17. Therefore, a person who has any liability is liable for the entire judgment.” And, even though the city did not object to the contractor’s ...

Read More »

01-1443 State v. Cotton

Andrew Cotton appeals his judgment of conviction of a disorderly conduct municipal forfeiture and an order denying his motion to suppress evidence. Cotton argues that there was no reasonable suspicion to pull his car over and that his continued detention was unjustified. We conclude that Cotton failed to preserve these issues in the context of his plea to a county ...

Read More »

01-0970 Beverly Enterprises, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission

“We do not agree with Beverly Enterprises that we should begin our analysis by deciding if LIRC’s interpretation of 26 U.S.C. § 104(a)(1) in [Lancour v. Mauer Bakeries, WC claim No. 84-54115 (LIRC 1990)] was correct. The basis for LIRC’s decision that Beverly Enterprises owed Lewis-Jones $10,097.30 was not a rejection of the merits of the company’s interpretation of the ...

Read More »

01-1950 In the Matter of the Refusal of Steven C. Hinzman: State v. Hinzmann

Steven Hinzmann appeals from the trial court’s order determining that he unlawfully refused to submit to a chemical test. He contends that since he did ultimately agree to submit to a blood test, the purpose of the refusal statute was met and that certain of the officer’s explanations and the officer’s attempt to obtain his signature interfered with his ability ...

Read More »

01-4024 Finer Foods, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture

“[D]oes Finer Foods have a decent chance of success on the merits? You bet it does. The suspension order, by the Chief of the Fruit and Vegetables Program Branch, apparently was issued without an opportunity for a hearing. The order itself gives no elaboration (beyond saying that Finer Foods has not turned over everything the Department demanded) and does not ...

Read More »

01-0507 State v. Jennings

“The State asserts that Jennings was formally accused and the prosecution commenced with the timely filing of the complaint and the issuance of an order to produce. It argues that an order to produce is sufficiently like a warrant or a summons to commence a prosecution where, as here, Jennings was in the custody of a state correctional facility when ...

Read More »

01-1166 County of Waukesha v. Islami

Ydbi Islami appeals from a judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI), first offense. Islami was found guilty of the charge following a jury trial. He is contesting the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence of a breath test obtained pursuant to the implied consent law. On appeal, Islami contends that the arresting ...

Read More »

00-3864 South Austin Coalition Community Council, et al. v. SBC Communications Inc.

“Plaintiffs … alleg[e] that before the merger both SBC and Ameritech were regulated common carriers, each a monopolist of land-lines service in its assigned territory. Thus plaintiffs allege a diminution in potential competition, rather than a merger between firms currently competing in overlapping markets. And this is fatal to the suit, because an exception to sec.7 of the Clayton Act ...

Read More »

01-0738 State v. Burroughs

“Physical force is not essential to a finding of confinement. Wis JI-Criminal 1275. Nor are we persuaded that the presence of an opportunity to escape requires the victim to take that risk, and we know of no law that so holds. “Sharon testified that Burroughs took her to a strange apartment under the guise of locating her missing cousin. Once ...

Read More »

01-0094 State ex rel. Santner v. Schwartz

Mark Santner, pro se, appeals from the circuit court’s order affirming his probation revocation. Santner argues that his revocation hearing was not timely held, violating Wis. Stat. sec. 302.335(2)(b) (1999-2000) and his right to due process. We resolve these issues against Santner. Accordingly, we affirm. Santner raises two substantive claims. First, Santner contends that his revocation hearing was not held ...

Read More »

01-3055 In the Matter of: Qualitech Steel Corporation

“Perhaps the authorization of dip financing and the associated use of preference- recovery proceeds for ‘adequate security’ was imprudent; that some of the secured lenders refused to advance any more funds, even with super-security, suggests as much. (Though the fact that others of their number put up extra money, knowing that they were undersecured, implies a belief that keeping Qualitech ...

Read More »

01-0758 State v. Campbell

We agree with Campbell that the Ohio forgery statute is broader than Wisconsin’s, and that looking solely at the language of the Ohio statute would be insufficient to prove that Campbell was guilty of possessing a firearm as a felon. However, we are not limited to considering the language of the statute. “Rather, we agree with the State that the ...

Read More »

01-0639 State ex rel. Hampton v. Schwarz

Corey J. Hampton, pro se, appeals from the circuit court order affirming his probation revocation. He argues: (1) that his due process rights were repeatedly violated; (2) that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erroneously exercised discretion by allowing the introduction of hearsay evidence during his revocation hearing; (3) that the “proceedings undertaken and the decision to revoke [his] probation were ...

Read More »

00-4268 Shropshear v. Corporation Counsel of the City of Chicago, et al.

“The reason is the reciprocal relation between the length of the limitations period and the grounds for tolling (extending) it. E.g., Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 269 (1985); Chardon v. Fumero Soto, 462 U.S. 650, 661-62 (1983); Board of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U.S. 478, 484-86 (1980); Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454, 463-64 (1975); Cange ...

Read More »

01-0612 State v. Edwards

In State v. Flowers, 221 Wis.2d 20 (Ct. App. 1998), “the State failed to offer any evidence to prove that the defendant’s prior conviction fell within the five-year time limit of Wis. Stat. § 939.62. Thus, the State failed to “prove” that the requirements of § 939.62 and Wis. Stat. § 973.12 were satisfied. In this case, however, the State ...

Read More »

00-3554-CR State v. Molzahn

Andrew Molzahn appeals from a judgment convicting him of first-degree reckless homicide with the use of a dangerous weapon. Molzahn also appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. He also raises a host of other ...

Read More »

00-2949 Kalan v. City of St. Francis

“[W]e have held that when a new party intervenes in a case proceeding before a magistrate judge by consent of the original parties, ‘[u]nless the latecomer, too, consents, the whole proceeding before the magistrate judge may be set at naught.’ Gruber, 38 F.3d at 370 (citing Jaliwala, 945 F.2d 221). This rule derives from the axiom that the consent of ...

Read More »

01-1636-CR, 01-1637-CR, 01-1638-CR State v. Roberts

William H. Roberts pled no contest to bail jumping as a repeater. He seeks relief from the plea on the grounds that he never admitted his repeater status at the time of the plea nor did the State prove his repeater status. Roberts also seeks relief from his pleas to operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI), fourth offense, and ...

Read More »

00-3395 Hedrich v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, et al.

“Hedrich urges that she was stigmatized by the defendants’ statements that she did not meet Whitewater’s standards of scholarship. This inference can be drawn, however, from practically every denial of tenure or termination. ‘Labeling an employee as incompetent or otherwise unable to meet an employer’s expectations does not infringe the employee’s liberty.’ Head v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trustees, ...

Read More »