Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / News/page 1250

News

00-0696 State ex rel. Reisch v. Schwarz

LeRoy Reisch appeals the trial court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of certiorari as untimely filed under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). Reisch argues that the PLRA violates his right to equal protection because it requires prisoners in Wisconsin to file petitions for certiorari review within forty-five days, but does not require those incarcerated outside of Wisconsin to ...

Read More »

99-3263 Rabideau v. City of Racine

“[T]he relationships between a victim and a spouse, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild or sibling are deeply embedded in the organization of our law and society. The emotional loss experienced by a bystander who witnessed the negligent death or injury of one of these categories of individuals is more readily addressed because it is less likely to be fraudulent and is ...

Read More »

00-492 Alabama v. Bozeman

“[T]he Agreement makes no distinction among different kinds of IV(c) ‘arrivals,’ say, by exempting those that are followed by return within a short, specified period of time, or those that are simply for the purpose of arraignment. Given the Agreement’s language and the important consequences of starting the running of the 120-day time limit, we see no basis for such ...

Read More »

00-1031 Zurkowski v. Hobart Corporation, et al.

Jay E. Zurowski appeals from a judgment entered after a bench trial wherein the trial court dismissed his personal injury claim alleging negligence and a violation of Wisconsin’s Safe Place Statute against Hobart Corporation (Hobart). Zurowski claims the trial court erred in two respects: (1) when it concluded that Hobart was not negligent; and (2) when it determined that a ...

Read More »

99-1702 Waters v. Pertzborn

“We conclude that there are two statutory impediments to the circuit court’s order for separate trials on the issues of liability and damages before different juries. First, a review of the history of sec. 805.05(2) reveals that the omission of a provision that would allow for the bifurcation of separate issues was deliberate and was intended to disallow such bifurcation. ...

Read More »

00-3465Miami Nation of Indians of Indiana, Inc. v. United States Department of the Interior

“By promulgating … regulations the executive brings the tribal recognition process within the scope of the Administrative Procedure Act. … And the Act has been interpreted (1) to require agencies, on pain of being found to have acted arbitrarily and capriciously, to comply with their own regulations (whether formal, as here, or common-law-type doctrines) until the regulations are altered by ...

Read More »

99-8508 Kyllo v. United States

“[I]n the case of the search of the interior of homes – the prototypical and hence most commonly litigated area of protected privacy – there is a ready criterion, with roots deep in the common law, of the minimal expectation of privacy that exists, and that is acknowledged to be reasonable. To withdraw protection of this minimum expectation would be ...

Read More »

00-2792-CR State v. Rodgriguez

Angel Rodriguez appeals, following a jury trial, from a judgment convicting him of attempted first-degree intentional homicide and burglary, both while armed with a dangerous weapon, and from an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. Rodriguez claims he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to object to the prosecutor’s statements and questions concerning Rodriguez’s ...

Read More »

99-0933 Urban v. Grasser and Heritage Mutual Insurance Co.

Plaintiff had to cross defendant’s property because it was the only legal means of access to his boat. “The sole purpose of Urban’s walk over David’s property was to gain access to his boat to use for recreational purposes. Throughout the weekend, including the day on which his injury occurred, he carried various items from his automobile to the boat ...

Read More »

00-1663Luder v. Endicott

“The plaintiffs are seeking to accomplish exactly what they would accomplish were they allowed to maintain this suit against the state and did so successfully: they are seeking to force the state to accede to their view of the Act and to pay them accordingly. Nominally, it is true, they are seeking damages merely for a period beginning three years ...

Read More »

00-2839 Johnson Bank v. Brandon Apparel

“Here, the parties submitted affidavits with conflicting statements as to whether an oral agreement existed. While the trial court may have considered the parties’ affidavits, some matters are ‘too grave to be decided on affidavits.’ [Citation]. Unless the facts are undisputed or the right to a hearing is waived, a party or attorney is entitled to more than a trial ...

Read More »

00-1784-CR State v. Handal

Eduardo D. Handal appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. The issue on appeal is whether Handal received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Because we agree with the circuit court’s conclusion that Handal did not receive ineffective assistance of trial counsel, we affirm. This opinion will not be published.

Read More »

No. 105Kansas v. Colorado

“At one point in time, the fact that the claim was unliquidated would have been of substantial importance… This common-law distinction has long since lost its hold on the legal imagination. Beginning in the early part of the last century, numerous courts and commentators have rejected the distinction for failing to acknowledge the compensatory nature of interest awards. This Court ...

Read More »

00-1663Luder v. Endicott (55270)

“The plaintiffs are seeking to accomplish exactly what they would accomplish were they allowed to maintain this suit against the state and did so successfully: they are seeking to force the state to accede to their view of the Act and to pay them accordingly. Nominally, it is true, they are seeking damages merely for a period beginning three years ...

Read More »

00-1958 Lake Bluff Housing Partners v. City of South Milwaukee

“The trial court found, as a result, that the harm was caused by Lake Bluff’s business decision to proceed with construction before the final legality was determined. In essence, the trial court concluded that Lake Bluff was the party with unclean hands. The trial court’s findings were not clearly erroneous, and its decision was reasonable.” Further, we reject plaintiffs’ contention ...

Read More »

01-0444-FT City of Brookfield v. Ulmen

The City of Brookfield appeals from an order dismissing two uniform traffic citations that charged Daniel D. Ulmen with operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) and operating a motor vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration (PAC) respectively. The dismissal order followed the trial court’s ruling that the temporary detention of Ulmen’s vehicle was not authorized under Wis. Stat. sec. ...

Read More »

99-0327 Minnesota Fire & Casualty o. v. Paper Recycling of La Crosse

“The activity that the boys were engaged in, crawling through stacks of baled paper, while lighting matches and starting fires, is not included in the second part of the immunity statute’s definition which lists 28 specific recreational activities. Nor is the activity of the boys included, specifically, in the third part’s broad definition providing that a recreational activity is ‘outdoor ...

Read More »

00-3897Otto v. SEC

“[W]e need not decide the issue of whether the NASD is a state actor in this case because Otto admitted all of the facts necessary to establish his guilt, which dooms his due process arguments.” “Given Otto’s admissions coupled with the incriminating documentation he sent throughout her investment, Otto’s claims that the proceedings were unfair and violated his due process ...

Read More »

00-3527 State of Wisconsin ex rel. Michael Gendrich v. Litscher, Secretary of the Department of Corrections

“We have reviewed the return to the writ of certiorari and find that there is substantial evidence to support the Commission’s conclusion that Gendrich’s release would pose a substantial risk to the public because he remains an untreated sex offender. Gendrich has completed the “Denier’s Program” but has not yet completed Sex Offender Treatment. Early during his incarceration, he refused ...

Read More »

00-3013-CR State v. Martin

Richard Martin pled guilty to operating while under the influence of an intoxicant, second offense, contrary to Wis. Stat. sec. 346.63(1)(a). He appeals his conviction, contending that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress evidence. Martin claims that the arresting officer lacked reasonable suspicion to detain him and conduct an investigation. This court concludes that the ...

Read More »

01-1145In Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Alexis J.: State v. Kristin J.

Kristin J. appeals the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights to Alexis J. following the trial court’s entry of a default judgment against her. She also appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion asking for relief from the judgment. She contends that her due process rights were violated when the trial court entered a default judgment after she ...

Read More »

01-2441Garza v. Lappin

“Nothing in the OAS Charter suggests an intention that member states will be bound by the Commission’s decisions before the American Convention goes into effect. To the contrary, the OAS Charter’s reference to the Convention shows that the signatories to the Charter intended to leave for another day any agreement to create an international human rights organization with the power ...

Read More »

00-1846 State v. Multaler

“The affidavit establishes that serial killers are uniquely likely to have a strong psychological compulsion to keep evidence of their crimes, even when they know they are under investigation. In fact, the affidavit establishes that serial killers may unreasonably flirt with the risk of being detected, as part of the nature of their unique criminal mentality.” Further, defendant has failed ...

Read More »

00-3180-CR State v. Roesing

Victoria D. Roesing appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury found her guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant or other drug contrary to Wis. Stat. sec. 346.63(1)(a) (1999-2000). Roesing claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it: (1) denied the defendant’s motion in limine to exclude HGN (Horizontal ...

Read More »

99-C-209Sandra Remer v. Burlington Area School District, et al.

“As it is undisputed that the district informed M.R. of the charges against him, informed him of the date and time of his expulsion hearing, and granted him an opportunity to present exonerating or mitigating evidence, no rational juror could find that the defendants violated M.R.’s procedural due process rights.” “Here, the facts show that Principal Martinez presented the school ...

Read More »

00-2605 State v. Ramirez

“This history reveals that Wis. Stat. sec. 943.201(2) was targeted at much more than the isolated act of misappropriating the personal identifying information of another or the initial receipt by the defendant of a thing of value as a result of the misappropriation. Rather, the legislation addressed a problem of much larger proportion with far greater consequences. Given this scope, ...

Read More »

00-3558-CR State v. Burks

Susan Burks appeals her judgment of conviction for operating while under the influence of an intoxicant, third offense, contrary to Wis. Stat. sec. 346.63(1)(a). Burks argues that the circuit court erred by denying her motion to suppress the results of a blood test when the blood was drawn without her consent as a search incident to an arrest and after ...

Read More »

00-1101 & 00-1505Higbee v. Sentry Insurance Co.

“Here, although the release discussed at the conference purported to waive all of Higbee’s claims, the parties had not even discussed the worker’s compensation claim. Indeed, Higbee’s own attorney had ‘forgot[ten] all about that’ until a day or two after the conference. Higbee obviously wished to preserve this claim, but Sentry, at least at the conference, sought nothing less than ...

Read More »

00-1888 Stelter , et al. v. Green Lantern Restaurant Inc., et al.

Jennie Stelter appeals from a judgment which dismissed her personal injury complaint against Green Lantern Restaurant and Secura Insurance with costs, in accordance with a jury verdict. She claims the trial court should have granted default judgment in her favor because Green Lantern’s answer to the complaint was delinquent. Green Lantern and Secura cross-appeal the trial court’s refusal to grant ...

Read More »