I recently gave the Wisconsin Court of Appeals credit for changing, perhaps intentionally or inadvertently, one of the sillier family law rules in Wisconsin with its decision in Tierney v. Berger, No. 2011AP565.

It is bad enough that the Wisconsin Supreme Court is wrong on the public policy regarding the modifiability of child support. Now, thanks to an April decision, the justices not only continue to be wrong about the public policy involved -- they also have confused what should be simple law.

Listening to oral arguments is generally frustrating for me.

Could it be that our Supreme Court, which has gone over two years without deciding a single significant family law case, could have not one, but two such cases before it in the present term? Am I dreaming?