Court of Appeals opinions January 31, 2008

Including recommended for publication

State v. Edmunds (2007AP933)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary
Update: Department of Justice press release February 19, 2008, State will seek Supreme Court review of Court of Appeals decision vacating homicide conviction of Audrey Edmunds

State v. Mark (2007AP522)

Portage Daily Register v. Columbia Co. Sheriff's Department (2007AP323)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Bloom v. Grawoig (In re the Estate of Becker 2007AP42)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary
Update: David Ziemer reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 5, 2008, Attorney fees must come from whole estate: Award from portion of estate not authorized

State v. Nawrocki (2006AP2502-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Harrell (2005AP2393)

Court of Appeals certification January 31, 2008

State v. Denk (2006AP1744-CR) "whether the police may search the personal belongings of a passenger that are found outside a motor vehicle incident to the arrest of the driver based on the reasoning of State v. Pallone, 2000 WI 77, 236 Wis. 2d 162, 613 N.W.2d 568."

Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee announces campaign agreements and committee membership changes

In a press release today, the Judicial Campaign Watch announced "State Supreme Court Justice Louis Butler was joined by Judge Lisa Neubauer and Atty. William Gleisner, candidates for the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, District II, in signing" its Judicial Election Campaign Advertising Agreement.

Regarding committee membership,

Retired Judge David Deininger, who is a member of the newly-created Government Accountability Board, was selected by lot to chair the board for 2008 on Monday, January 21, and has resigned from the WJCIC. ...

[State Bar President and WJCIC Chairman Tom] Basting ... announced two new committee members. "I am pleased to announce that DeEtte Beilfuss Eager and John Torinus will be joining the committee," Basting said. Ms. Eager has been active in a range of community and statewide activities throughout her life, including appointments to the Wisconsin Arts Board by Governors Dreyfus and Thompson. She was formerly married to the late Supreme Court Chief Justice Bruce Beilfuss. Mr. Torinus is Chairman and CEO of Serigraph Inc. of West Bend, a columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and a member of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce Board of Directors.

Update: Stacy Forster at All Politics Watch posts Judicial campaign watchdog gets new members
(via Judicial Campaign Watch)

Court of Appeals opinions January 30, 2008

None recommended for publication.

Update: Among these unpublished opinions was

State v. Fermanich (2007AP1792-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Student blog GOP3.com finalist in competition

Sarah Krasin reports in The Marquette Tribune, summarized

GOP3.com, a conservative blog run by Marquette students and an alumnus, has been chosen as a finalist in a blogging competition.

The winner of the competition will be chosen in April and receive a grand prize of $10,000.

GOP3.com was started in response to the Adopt-a-Sniper scandal at Marquette.

Media Advisory

Next at Judicial Campaign Watch, a Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee Update.

Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee (WJCIC) Chairman Tom Basting and other committee members will address the Madison Rotary Club on Wednesday, January 30 in the Mendota Room, Exhibition Hall at the Alliant Energy Center. They will offer an update on the committee’s mission (monitoring the 2008 state Supreme Court election campaign and educating the public about the unique role of judges in our democracy), including announcements regarding pledges signed by judicial candidates and committee membership.

Before "...Chairman Tom Basting and other committee members will address the Madison Rotary Club...", wouldn't WJCIC first have to amend Regulations and Procedures Number 4?

Only the Chair or his/her designee may communicate with the press or issue statements on behalf of the Committee. ...

For background to this event, refer again at the minutes of the August 17, 2007 meeting of the State Bar's Professionalism Committee, Mr. Basting's briefing to members noted that

In 2003, the National Center for State Courts established the National Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Judicial Campaign Oversight...

If you look at its website you'll see it would be more complete to say

The National Ad Hoc Advisory Committee was established by the National Center for State Courts to enhance the quality of judicial campaigns and candidate behavior by encouraging the establishment of and supporting the work of judicial campaign conduct committees. The committee's efforts are funded, in part, by the Law and Society Program of the Open Society Institute.

(The latter was founded and chaired by George Soros.)

The Center's Committee provides a Effective Judicial Campaign Conduct Committees: A How-To Handbook which includes advice on who should be members (pp. 9-10). You can also look at the Inaugural Issue, Volume 1, Number 1, of Judicial Campaign Oversight Digest on how such committees use campaign conduct pledges.

News Roundup

At Judicial Campaign Watch

Since State Bar of Wisconsin President Tom Basting announced the formation of the Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee, the WJCIC has been in the news alot [sic].

Including Committee calls on Supreme Court candidate to take back remarks

Not noted, but apparently taken back, was this from the minutes of the August 17, 2007 meeting of the State Bar's Professionalism Committee, at which Mr. Basting briefed the members on judicial campaign oversight committees.

These oversight committees are 501c3s, are independent, and are non-profits with no affiliation to the bar or Supreme Court.

...

Any campaign oversight committee / task force formed would be a separate, independent, permanent group. Its funding would come from a variety of sources; such as grants.

Seventh Circuit reverses dismissal of challenge to diploma privilege

Wiesmueller v. Kosobucki (07-2601)

Plaintiff's passing the Wisconsin bar exam did not make the case moot when his petition for certification as a class action was pending.

Update: David Ziemer reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 31, 2008 Challenge to diploma privilege revived: Commerce Clause challenge goes back to district court

Court hopefuls to debate on Internet

Dee J. Hall reports in the Wisconsin State Journal.

Justice Louis Butler and Burnett County Circuit Judge Michael Gableman will square off during a one-hour Internet radio debate hosted by a UW-Milwaukee student.

It's scheduled for 4:30 p.m. today on Panther Talk Live.

The debate is thought to be the first of its kind in a Wisconsin political race, said Kyle Duerstein, the journalism student who is hosting the program. Listeners will be able to hear the candidates debate and call in with questions.

(via WisPolitics)

Update: WisPolitics reports Butler, Gableman clash on law enforcement credentials in first Supreme Court debate

Update 2: The Associated Press reports in the LaCrosse Tribune, January 30, 2008, Judicial activism, clean campaigning focus of spirited debate
(via Judicial Campaign Watch)

Update 3: Emily Smolarek reported in The Badger Herald, January 30, 2008, Online state Supreme Court debate turns fiery

Court of Appeals opinions January 29, 2008

Including recommended for publication

Willowglen Academy - Wisconsin, Inc. v. Connelly Interiors, Inc. (2007AP1178)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Christensen v. Sullivan (2006AP803)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Among the unpublished opinions were

In re the Marriage of Heidenreich (Heidenreich v. Marquardt 2007AP001529-FT)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

In re the Termination of Parental Rights to Abbegail S. (Brown County Department of Human Services v. Hushtola J. 2007AP1390)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Aslani v. Country Creek Homes, Inc. (2007AP503)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Supreme Court opinion January 29, 2008

Disciplinary matter only.

A Bibliography of Criticism of the Butler Era

by Daniel Suhr at The Triumvirate, January 28, 2008

Year in Review - Important Opinions of 2007

The Wisconsin Law Journal, January 28, 2008, gives one sentence summaries of Wisconsin Supreme Court and Wisconsin Court of Appeals civil and criminal opinions.

Review granted in 'Watton v. Hegerty'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP3092)

This case examines whether copies of certain emergency detention statements generated and retained by the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) are subject to Wis. Stat. § 19.35, the state’s open records law, or if they are confidential treatment records under Wis. Stat. § 51.30 (4).

Some background: Milwaukee Police Chief Nanette Hegerty seeks review of a Court of Appeals' decision, which reversed a circuit court order. The circuit court order denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by attorney Michael Watton, who sought to compel the police department to produce documents addressing Sidney Gray’s emergency detention. The city produced the requested records, excluding the retained emergency reports.

Watton represents the estate and family of Frank Moore II, who was shot and killed by Gray the day after Gray was released from police custody. Watton asserts that Gray’s release was the result of negligence by MPD.

The trial court concluded that the MPD-retained emergency detention reports, produced when Gray was taken to the Milwaukee County Mental Health Center, were confidential under Wis. Stat. § 51.30(4) as "treatment records," and therefore exempt from disclosure under the open records statute.

In reversing, the Court of Appeals [2007 WI APP 267] concluded that the trial court misconstrued the relevant statutes. From Milwaukee County.

Review granted in 'State v. Hubbard'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP2753)

This case involves the meaning of "materially impaired" to determine whether a person is "under the influence" for injury by intoxicated use of a vehicle. The state seeks review of a decision reversing Jonathan Hubbard's conviction for injury by intoxicated use of a vehicle. The Court of Appeals [2007 WI APP 240] agreed with Hubbard that the circuit court erroneously responded to a jury’s request for clarification of the term "materially impaired."

Some background: While driving in Mequon in 2005, Hubbard had rear-ended another vehicle and pushed it off the road into a tree. The crash resulted in serious injuries to a nine-year-old girl. Officers on the scene described Hubbard as uninjured but "disoriented." Hubbard explained that he had taken prescription medication earlier in the day. Further investigation turned up several types of medication in Hubbard's car.

The State charged Hubbard with injury by intoxicated use of a vehicle. The case went to trial, and at the close of arguments, the jury received instructions. The heart of the dispute seems to be whether, as Hubbard contends, "materially impaired" is a technical term with a peculiar meaning under State v. Waalen, 130 Wis. 2d 18, 27, 386 N.W.2d 47 (1986), or, as the state maintains, that the Waalen case supports the view that the words "materially impaired" should be accorded their common and ordinary meaning.

A decision by the Supreme Court could help resolve a narrow legal question on which a circuit court and Court of Appeals disagree. From Ozaukee County.

State's chief justice seeks suggestions from local officials

Mark Gunderman reported in the Chippewa Falls Herald on Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson's stop in Chippewa County, part of her tour of the courts of all Wisconsin Counties.

Abrahamson rejected the labels of conservative and liberal when it comes to judges and judicial decisions.

"It has no meaning in court. You apply the law to the facts," she said. "Judges may disagree on interpretation of the law, but it’s hard to put a label on that in a partisan fashion."

(via The Wheeler Report)

Petition filed to permit citing unpublished opinions

On January 25, 2008, the Wisconsin Judicial Council filed a petition with the Wisconsin Supreme Court for an order amending § 809.23(3) to read:

809.23(3) CITATION OF UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

(a) An unpublished opinion may not be cited in any court of this state as precedent or authority, except to support a claim of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, or the law of the case.

(b) In addition to the purposes specified in sub. (a), an unpublished opinion may be cited for its persuasive value. Because an unpublished opinion cited for its persuasive value is not precedent, it is not binding on any court of this state, and a court need not distinguish or otherwise discuss it.

The Judicial Council Note would then read:

Section (3) was revised to reflect that unpublished Wisconsin appellate opinions are increasingly available in electronic form. This change also conforms to the practice in numerous other jurisdictions, and is compatible with, though more limited than, Fed. R. App. P. 32.1, which abolished any restriction on the citation of unpublished federal court opinions, judgments, orders and dispositions issued on or after January 1, 2007. The revision to Section (3) does not alter the non-precedential nature of unpublished Wisconsin appellate opinions.

'In re: Proposed Amendments to Wisconsin Statute (Rule 809.23(3)' (08-02)

Update: Tony Anderson reported in the Wisconsin Law Jounal, January 30, 2008, Petition seeks ability to cite unpublished opinions

This Week in Liberal Judicial Activism: Week of January 28, 2008

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos.

Mr. Whelan was the featured speaker at our chapter's March 8, 2007 luncheon.

P.S. At National Review Online, Mr. Whelan's post Far From Sober responds to Slate’s defense of Linda Greenhouse. His post was, in turn, the subject of the post Don’t shoot the messenger by Mollie Hemingway at Get Religion. (The photo of Mr. Whelan in her post is mine from his appearance at our chapter.)

Justice reveals her lighter side

Candy Czernicki reports in the Eau Claire Leader-Telegram on Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson's stop in "Chippewa County Friday afternoon as part of her ongoing tour of the state...".

"All our (Supreme Court) conferences start off with (Justice) Patrick Crooks reading the horoscope of the day," she said to laughter. "It's our way of saying 'we're all in this together.' We trade horoscopes, but we can't trade opinions. If you become disagreeable because somebody disagrees with you, you become a very unhappy justice."

(via WisPolitics)

Contingency fee struck down

If your fee comes out to $5,700 per hour, and your client seeks disgorgement, try looking for procedural loopholes, rather than arguing the reasonableness of the fee on the merits.

Bad jury instruction not plain error

Despite the 2003 amendment to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 51, for all intents and purposes, the Seventh Circuit is still applying the same old standard for whether an erroneous jury instruction is grounds for a new trial.

Court of Appeals opinions January 24, 2008

Including recommended for publication

State v. Johnson (2007AP1114-CR and 2007AP1115-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary
Update: David Ziemer reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 29, 2008, Sentence credit denied on concurrent sentence: Custody must be "in connection with" crime

Preston v. Meriter Hospital, Inc. (2006AP3013)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Townsend (2006AP1440-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Marten-Hoye (2006AP1104-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary
Update: David Ziemer reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 1, 2008, Handcuffs don’t equal ‘custody’: Search incident to citation held unlawful


Among the unpublished opinions was

Dane County v. Kasinski (2007AP1684 )
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Is The Mississippi Bar Doing Enough to Combat Corruption and to Protect the Honor and Integrity of the Profession?

Audio and video of this January 17, 2008, panel discussion at The University Club, Jackson, Mississippi

Panelists include:
Robert R. Bailess, Wheeless, Shappley, Bailess & Rector and President, The Mississippi Bar
Mark A. Chinn, Chinn & Associates
Merrida (Buddy) Coxwell, Coxwell & Associates and Past President of MTLA
W. Wayne Drinkwater, Jr., Bradley, Arant, Rose & White
Adam B. Kilgore, General Counsel, The Mississippi Bar
J. Scott Newton, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz
Carlton W. Reeves, Pigott, Reeves & Johnson and President, The Magnolia Bar Association
Moderator: Brad Prewitt, Prewitt Group, P.A. and Co-President, Mississippi Federalist Society Lawyers Chapter

'Plastics Engineering Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.' certified to WI

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit yesterday (06-4397 and 07-1041) certified to the Wisconsin Supreme Court the questions

(1) what constitutes an "occurrence" in an insurance contract when exposure injuries are sustained by numerous individuals, at varying geographical locations, over many years; (2) whether Wisconsin Statute § 631.43(1) applies to successive insurance policies; and (3) whether Wisconsin courts would adopt an "all sums" or pro rata allocation approach to determining liability when an injury spans multiple, successive insurance policies.

(via The Wheeler Report)

Update: David Ziemer reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 28, 2008, Three insurance issues certified to state Supreme Court.

Court of Appeals opinions January 23, 2008

Including recommended for publication

Maynard Steel Casting Co. v. Sheedy (2006AP3149)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee (2006AP2866)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary
Marie Rohde reports in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, January 24, 2008, VFW post wins lost-lease case in appeals court


Update: Among the unpublished opinions were

Schuster-Kartes v. Schoenbeck (2007AP1545 )
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Omegbu v. Biller Hotel, Ltd (2006AP2448)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

The obvious and the obfuscated

It took the court of appeals 17 paragraphs of analysis to explain why it doesn't violate the First Amendment to call the police with a bomb scare.

How the judges fared

The annual affirmance and reversal rates for all of Wisconsin's trial judges.

This Week in Liberal Judicial Activism: Week of January 21, 2008

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos.

Mr. Whelan was the featured speaker at our chapter's March 8, 2007 luncheon.

On the Issues: Justice Butler and Judge Gableman

Mike Gousha's series of presentations at of Marquette University Law School recently featured Justice Louis Butler of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and then his challenger in the upcoming election, Judge Michael Gableman of the Circuit Court for Burnett County.

Arguments week of January 20th

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has scheduled oral argument in the following.

January 23, 2008 at Dist. II, 2727 North Grandview Blvd., Waukesha

9:30 a.m. Glenn Staege v. Town of Norway (2007AP231)

'Amendment of SCR 40.04 Legal Competence Requirement: Bar Examination'

Arnold J. Moncada, Jr., filed a petition of to eliminate or ease the limit on bar examination attempts in SCR 40.04(5). The Wisconsin Supreme Court held a public hearing November 17, 2007. On January 17, 2008, the court voted (6-1) to repeal SCR 40.04(5), effective immediately.

'In the matter of the Amendment of SCR 40.04 Legal Competence Requirement: Bar Examination' (07-04)

Court of Appeals opinions January 17, 2008

None recommended for publication.

Update: These unpublished opinions were

Mental Commitment of Jennifer R.M. (2007AP2011)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v Zoril (2007AP1320)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Supreme Court opinion January 17, 2008

Disciplinary matter only.

Arguments January 17th

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the following.

9:45 a.m. Town of Madison v. County of Dane (2006AP2554)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio

10: 45 a.m. Taneceia Larry v. Derrick L. Harris, et al. (2005AP2935)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio

1:30 p.m. State v. Ronell E. Harris (2006AP882-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio

Court of Appeals opinions January 16, 2008

None recommended for publication.

Update: These unpublished opinions were

In re the Termination of Parental Rights to Richard C. III (2007AP2408)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Lakeside Gardens v. LaShay (2007AP1246)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Supreme Court opinion January 16, 2008

Disciplinary matter only.

Arguments January 16th

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the following.

9:45 a.m. State v. Clayborn L. Walker (2006AP562-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio

10:45 a.m. State v. David G. Straszkowski (2006AP64-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio

1:30 p.m. State v. Louis H. LaCount (2006AP672-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Audio


Update: The Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, reports Criminal cases on tap for state Supreme Court

Court of Appeals opinions January 15, 2008

Including recommended for publication

Methodist Manor Health Center, Inc. v. Py (2007AP736)
Update: Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, summary

State v. Robert T. (2006AP2206)
Update: Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, summary
Update 2: In the Janesville Gazette, January 15, 2008, the Associated Press reports Court: Wis. law criminalizing bomb threats is constitutional
(via WisPolitics)
Update 3: David Ziemer reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 18, 2008, Bomb scare statute upheld

Update: Among the unpublished opinions were

Abdullah v. Abdullah (2007AP341)
Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, summary

Sarnstrom v. Sarnstrom (2007AP264)
Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, summary

Andersen v. Department of Natural Resources (2007AP41)
Wisconsin Law Journal, January 15, 2008, summary

Arguments January 15th

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the following.

9:45 a.m. James R. Donohoo v. Action Wisconsin, et al. (2006AP396)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Update: The Wisconsin Law Journal, January 14, 2008, reported Supreme Court hears frivolousness case
Update 2: Audio

10:45 a.m. Racine County, et al. v. Int'l Assoc. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (2006AP964)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1094) and Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1956)
(see earlier post on grant of review)
Update: Audio

Review granted in 'State v. Bruce Duncan MacArthur'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP1379-CR)

This certification involves the interpretation of the statutes of limitation and whether it applies to crimes committed before the enactment of Wis. Stat. ch. 948.

Some background: In 2006, the state charged an 84-year-old former hospital Chaplin with several counts of sexual assault between March 1965 and June 1972 of three female minors who had been hospital patients. The criminal complaint states that MacArthur moved from Wisconsin in 1970. He was arrested in Missouri and waived extradition. His motion to dismiss was based upon the statute of limitations was denied. The District IV Court of Appeals [in an unpublished opinion] granted MacArthur’s petition for leave to appeal and the state’s petition for cross-appeal.

The state claims that the six-year statute of limitations was in effect at the time of the offenses. MacArthur claims the applicable statute was the one in effect in 2006, when the charges were brought. From Dodge County.

(via The Wheeler Report)

Review granted in 'Estate of Dale Otto v. Physicians Ins. Co.'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP1566)

This medical malpractice case involving two doctors, a medical clinic and their insurers, examines whether a default judgment was properly entered against an insurance company that allegedly failed to file a timely answer.

Some background: In 2003, the estate of Dale Otto and his surviving family members alleged that two physicians failed to diagnose that Mr. Otto’s gastroesophageal reflux disease had been replaced by metastic esophageal cancer. They suit named the two doctors, the clinic and two fictitious insurers.

The names of the fictitious insurers were replaced in an amended complaint with two real insurance companies, including Physicians Insurance Co. (PIC). The doctors and the clinic filed an answer in which they denied liability, but PIC was not listed in the text of the answer nor the signature block.

The attorney representing the doctors and clinic, who also had done work on behalf of PIC in the past, said his office had forgotten to include PIC on the list of answering defendants. The estate contends more than a dozen additional filings also failed to include PIC, however. After several months of further proceedings in the case and PIC's motion for leave to file an amended answer that included PIC, the estate moved for a default judgment against PIC, which the circuit court granted. The estate also dismissed its claims against the doctors and clinic. The circuit court found PIC was liable to the plaintiffs in the total amount of $801,760, which was reduced slightly on appeal.

The court of appeals [2007 WI App 192] concluded that because PIC had failed to show excusable neglect for its untimely answer, the circuit court had properly entered a default judgment against PIC regardless of the timely answer by PIC's insureds.

Since an insurer's liability derives from the liability of its insured, PIC asserts that it would be absurd to adjudge the provider defendants’ insurer liable for their negligence when the provider defendants themselves could have litigated the matter to completion and obtained a finding of no negligence and a dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint. PIC argues that the result of its default should at most be a finding that it had conceded providing coverage to the doctors and clinic. The court is expected to address whether an insurer's default should result in a judgment against it for the full amount of the plaintiff's claimed damages where the insurer's insureds have filed a timely answer and denied liability. From Dunn County.

(via The Wheeler Report)

Review granted in 'State v. Her'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP1239-CR)

This criminal case examines whether the state breached a plea agreement by acknowledging at a sentencing hearing that its sentencing recommendation pursuant to the plea agreement had been based on a factual error.

Some background: On Oct. 25, 2000, Her and an associate, Tong Xiong, were stopped by a Sheboygan police officer. Xiong and Her sped off after the officer determined that the care they were riding in had been stolen in Michigan. They subsequently broke into a rural home, pointed a deer rifle at the homeowner and bound the homeowner’s hands and feet before stealing his vehicle.

Approximately two years later, Xiong was arrested and ultimately pled guilty to one count of false imprisonment while armed and masked and one count of carjacking while masked. The circuit court sentenced Xiong to 10 years of initial confinement and five years of extended supervision on false imprisonment count and fifteen years of initial confinement and ten years of extended supervison the carjacking count -- to be served concurrently.

In 2004, police were finally able to track down and arrest Her, who was initially charged with the same offenses as Xiong plus a third count of intimidating a witness.

Operating under a mistaken recollection of the sentence Xiong received, the district attorney offered Her a plea agreement including ten years of initial confinement and five years extended supervision – five years fewer initial confinement. Her accepted the agreement and entered the appropriate pleas. The district attorney realized his mistake prior to sentencing and told Her's counsel that while he would stick with the agreed-upon sentencing recommendation, but would acknowledge his mistake at the sentencing hearing if questioned by the court. The court did question the district attorney and he explained his mistake in making the plea offer, but still made the agreed-upon recommendation.

Her filed a motion alleging that the state had breached its plea agreement. Her also claims ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to the alleged breach of plea agreement. The Court of Appeals [in an unpublished opinion] concluded that the district attorney’s honest answer to the court’s inquiry about the disparity in sentences did not constitute a breach of the plea agreement.

A decision by the Supreme Court could clarify the competing interests created by a plea agreement, which is subsequently undermined by truthful comments by a prosecutor. From Sheboygan County.

(via The Wheeler Report)

Review granted in 'Sanders v. Estate of Sanders'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2006AP424)

This case, which is before the Court for a second time, could help clarify when an order in a probate case can be considered final for the purpose of appeal. The Court of Appeals dismissed Diana Sanders’ 2002 appeal as premature; it dismissed a 2006 appeal as belated.

Some background: In 2000, following a will contest, David Sanders’ will was admitted to probate, giving his assets to his brothers and nephews and expressly excluding his wife, Diana. Diana and the estate disputed the value of property and the characterization of the assets as marital property.

The parties eventually reached some agreement, but some disputes remained about how much Diana would have to pay for farm property, based on different outside offers. On June 12, 2002, the trial court granted the guardian ad litem’s motion for relief from the settlement agreement and ordered the parties to pursue an $800,000 offer that was contingent on rezoning. Diana, who would be required to pay half the value, sought to purchase the property based on one half of a $375,000 offer.

Diana appealed, and in a Feb. 4, 2003 summary order, the Court of Appeals dismissed the first appeal, concluding the previous court orders were not final.

In 2006, the Supreme Court granted Diana’s first petition for review of an order dismissing for the second time her appeal in the in the probate of her husband’s estate. This court summarily vacated the 2006 dismissal order and remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration in light of two other cases.

On remand, the Court of Appeals again concluded her appeal was belated and dismissed.

In this petition for review Diana raises one issue: Whether a February 10, 2006 probate order was final for purpose of appeal. From Waupaca County.

(via The Wheeler Report)

Review granted in 'Manning v. Necedah Area School District'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has granted review in this case. (2005AP3093)

This case, which involves a bus driver who was accused of fondling students, addresses questions about the duty of school officials to report suspected sexual contact.

Some background: John Lynch was employed by the District as a bus driver from 1992 until 1998. In February 1998, a Juneau County Sheriff's deputy told a school psychologist for the District that his stepdaughter had told him that Lynch had touched the private parts of two elementary school girls who rode Lynch's bus. The psychologist and deputy reported these allegations to the District elementary principal, who directed the psychologist to investigate the allegations.

In March 1998, the psychologist provided a written report about her investigation to the principal and the District administrator. She also reported the allegations of abuse to the Juneau County Department of Human Services. The department placed a surveillance camera on Lynch's bus the following day and arrested him a few days later. Lynch was charged in Juneau County Circuit Court with 18 counts of illicit sexual conduct. He stopped driving for the District and he died before his criminal trial took place.

The circuit court concluded the district was not vicariously liable because Lynch was not acting within the scope of employment and that the district was immune from liability.

The Court of Appeals affirmed [in an unpublished opinion], concluding that the plaintiffs failed to show the Necedah Area School District breached a ministerial duty under § 48.981, Stats., to report suspected abuse. The Court of Appeals also concluded that the facts of record did not support a finding of a known and present danger.

The Supreme Court has been asked to determine whether the legislature, in enacting Wis. Stat. § 893.80(4), intended to limit immunity to matters involving governmental legislation or judicial discretion. More specicially in this case, if immunity is available given the circumstances. From Adams County.

(via The Wheeler Report)

This Week in Liberal Judicial Activism: Week of January 14, 2008

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos.

Mr. Whelan was the featured speaker at our chapter's March 8, 2007 luncheon.

Update: He notes this marks One Year of "This Week in Liberal Judicial Activism".

Judges can have no constituents

Our State Bar's President Thomas J. Basting has this opinion piece in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on the judicial campaign conduct committee he had the Bar create.

Kennedy and Coppi

Since The Green Bag requires that its occasional subscriber-bonus bobbleheads be picked up at its offices in Arlington, Virginia, I've been sending my certificates for same to an old friend who works in DC. He lost the Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead certificate to a household accident, but was able to get the Justice Anthony M. Kennedy bobblehead. It's pictured on his desk with his Fausto Coppi bobblehead as they "discuss the finer points of UCI's anti-doping laws".

Durably democratic

The Economist, January 10, 2008, reviews America's Three Regimes: A New Political History by Morton Keller.

America's decentralised system and multiple checks and balances have long ensured that no single faction can monopolise power. But since the Depression and Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, the power of the federal government has expanded at a gallop. This is Mr Keller's third regime. Books have been written about the so-called imperial presidency, the imperial Congress and the imperial judiciary. Why, Mr Keller wonders, has none yet been written with the title “The Imperial Bureaucracy”?

Let's Take Politics Out of Judicial Selection

Our State Bar's President Thomas J. Basting Sr. in his President's Message column in the January 2008 Wisconsin Lawyer magazine urges that governors place vetting of potential nominees to judicial vacancies in the hands of the recently-created Government Accountability Board.

10th Annual Faculty Conference

Audio and video of this January 3-4, 2008 event in New York City

'Memoralizing Settlements Reached by Way of Alternative Dispute Resolution' 2008 WI 2

On February 16, 2005, Attorney Donald Leo Bach filed a petition seeking to amend Wis. Stat. § 807.05 and to create Wis. Stat. § 802.12(5), relating to memorializing settlements reached by way of alternative dispute resolution. A public hearing was conducted on this petition on October 25, 2005. At the court's request, an amended petition was filed on January 26, 2006. ...

...

At the ensuing open administrative conference, the court ascertained that the concerns of all interested parties could be addressed by inclusion of comments to the relevant statutes, §§ 802.12 and 807.05...

IT IS ORDERED that the following comment shall be published with Wis. Stat. § 802.12:

See s. 807.05, formal requirements to render binding agreements reached in an action or special proceeding. In some cases, such as family law cases, court approval is required for an agreement to be effective.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following comment shall be published with Wis. Stat. § 807.05:

This section also applies to agreements, stipulations, and consents reached as a result of alternative dispute methods outlined in s. 802.12. In some cases, such as family law cases, court approval is required for an agreement to be effective.

'In the matter of the Creation of Wis. Stat. sec. 802.12(5) relating to Memoralizing Settlements Reached by Way of Alternative Dispute Resolution' (05-05)

'Creation of a Comity Rule for Continuing Legal Education' 2008 WI 1

On June 18, 2007, the Board of Bar Examiners (BBE) filed a petition proposing to amend SCR 31.04 to create a subparagraph (3) relating to comity for non-resident Wisconsin-licensed attorneys who meet the continuing legal education requirements of their home jurisdiction. A public hearing was held on November 27, 2007.

...

At the open administrative conference on December 10, 2007, the court voted to adopt a "pure comity" version of the proposed amendment, which will be in effect for the CLE reporting period ending December 31, 2008. Accordingly, effective the date of this order, Supreme Court Rule 31.04(3) is created to read:

SCR 31.04

(3) A lawyer whose practice is principally in another jurisdiction that has mandatory continuing legal education requirements and who is current in meeting those requirements is exempt from the attendance requirement of SCR 31.02, but shall comply with the reporting requirement of SCR 31.03.

'In the matter of the Amendment to Supreme Court Rule SCR 31.04 Relating to Creation of a Comity Rule for Continuing Legal Education' (07-08)

Arguments week of January 13th

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the following.

January 15, 2008

9:45 a.m. James R. Donohoo v. Action Wisconsin, et al. (2006AP396)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10:45 a.m. Racine County, et al. v. Int'l Assoc. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (2006AP964)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1094) and Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1956)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

January 16, 2008

9:45 a.m. State v. Clayborn L. Walker (2006AP562-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10:45 a.m. State v. David G. Straszkowski (2006AP64-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. State v. Louis H. LaCount (2006AP672-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

January 17, 2007

9:45 a.m. Town of Madison v. County of Dane (2006AP2554)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10: 45 a.m. Taneceia Larry v. Derrick L. Harris, et al. (2005AP2935)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. State v. Ronell E. Harris (2006AP882-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

Supreme Court candidates move forward full speed toward general election

Jack Zemlicka in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 10, 2008

Court of Appeals opinions January 10, 2008

None recommended for publication.


Update: Among these unpublished opinions were

Cost Cutters Leasing, LLC v. KLMP, LLC (2007AP1214)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Cullen-Smith LLC v. Merrill Iron & Steel, Inc. (2007AP580)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Rosneck v. State (2007AP497)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Mullen v. Mullen (2006AP2329)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Court of Appeals opinions January 9, 2008

Update 2: Recommended for publication

Gilbert v. Geiger (2007AP95)

Update: Unpublished opinions included

State v. Beasley (2007AP166)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Powers (2007AP1035-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Amending SCR Ch. 20 hearing today

9:30 a.m. today the Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled an open administrative conference 'In the Matter of the Petition of the State Bar of Wisconsin to Amend Chapter 20 of the Supreme Court Rules' (06-06). Here is audio of the April 12, 2007 hearing. In a November 5, 2007 order, the court set a February 1, 2008 deadline for comment and a February 22, 2008 9:30 a.m. open administrative conference on some aspects of the petition.

Update: Our State Bar reports Wisconsin Supreme Court takes up MJP, videoconferencing, and tribal court issues

Update 2: Jack Zemlicka in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 11, 2008, In-House Counsel Changes: Supreme Court allows in-house counsel to practice without being bar members

Update 3: Jack Zemlicka reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 17, 2008, In-House, Outside Bar: Rule allows non-resident attorneys to practice without State Bar membership

EDWBA site up

The Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association now has a website.

Not-so-natty neckwear raises judge's hackles

Derrick Nunnally reports in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel from the courtroom of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge William Sosnay.

In the courtroom of the pompadoured judge long known as a fastidious dresser, a sentencing hearing in a misdemeanor case was delayed for three hours Tuesday after a veteran prosecutor turned up for court wearing an ascot.

The veteran prosecutor is Warren D. Zier of the staff of the Milwaukee County District Attorney. Paragraph 1. of Subsection I. (effective April 4, 2007) of Rule 237 of the Milwaukee County Circuit Court Rules (First Judicial District) says,

Lawyers shall, while in a courtroom or a commissioner’s hearing room for any court proceeding, be dressed in professional attire and in such a manner so as to show respect for the dignity of the court. Professional attire means that men will wear coats and ties and women will wear dresses, suits or pantsuits. Each judge and court commissioner may make exceptions to these rules as they think appropriate.

The court explained,

"This is not about the definition of an ascot or a necktie," Sosnay said in court, addressing a reporter in the gallery directly while a case waited to be heard. "This is an issue which I believe deals with the integrity of the court."

While this might be clarified if there is an eventual appeal, it appears Judge Sosnay's position is not that an ascot fails to meet the tie requirement, but that "exceptions" allows for a more stringent, as well as less stringent, dress code in a particular branch of the court. As for Mr. Zier's position,

he said he won't change even in the face of Sosnay's allusion to possible contempt proceedings.

"I guess we'll deal with that if it gets to that point," Zier said.

Update: from Wikipedia, Ascot tie and Cravat.

Update 2: Leading Regional News Briefs in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, January 11, 2008, Lawyer wears ascot but gets no comment

Update 3: Tony Anderson reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 11, 2008, on Tying up court over an ascot

Update 4: Jack Zemlicka reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 16, 2008, on Appropriate Apparel: Suitable attorney attire mostly a matter of taste in Wisconsin

Court: No ban on lawyering by telephone

Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog on the United States Supreme Court's January 7, 2008 Per Curiam decision in Wright v. Van Patten. This was a habeas corpus challenge to Wright's conviction on a no contest plea in the Circuit Court for Shawano County after a hearing at which his attorney appeared by telephone.

Update: David Ziemer reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, January 11, 2008, Attorney can appear by phone: No precedent requires attorney's physical presence

Transfers of Civil Cases to Tribal Court hearing today

9:30 a.m. today the Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled a public hearing regarding 'In re discretionary transfer of civil cases to tribal court' (07-11). The matter comes before the court on a Petition by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts.

Update: Hearing audio

Update 2: Our State Bar reports Wisconsin Supreme Court takes up MJP, videoconferencing, and tribal court issues

Videoconferencing in the Courts hearing today

9:30 a.m. today the Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled a public hearing regarding 'In re videoconferencing use in the courts' (07-12). The matter comes before the court on a Petition by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts.

Update: Hearing audio from the morning and from the afternoon

Update 2: Our State Bar reports Wisconsin Supreme Court takes up MJP, videoconferencing, and tribal court issues

Court of Appeals opinions January 8, 2008

None recommended for publication.


Update: Among these unpublished opinions are:

Wamboldt v. West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. (2005AP1874)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Tomlinson (2006AP1780)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Blalock (2006AP2126)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Hamilton (2007AP48-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

State v. Aguirre (2007AP882-CR)
Wisconsin Law Journal summary

Electronic Filing in Circuit Court hearing set

On December 6, 2006, A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts, filed a petition asking this court to create a new rule implementing electronic filing in the Wisconsin circuit courts. ... On December 21, 2007, the petitioner filed an amended petition which reflects programming changes necessitated by budget considerations.

In this January 4, 2008 order the Wisconsin Supreme Court scheduled a Public Hearing for April 8, 2008, 9:30 a.m..

'In the matter of the Creation of a Court Rule Governing Electronic Filing in the Circuit Courts' (06-08)


Update: Jane Pribek reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 20, 2008, Justices will consider electronic filing of court documents

Electronic Signatures by Court Officials hearing set

On December 6, 2006, A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts, filed a petition seeking to create a supreme court rule authorizing the use of electronic signatures by court officials.

In this January 4, 2008 order the Wisconsin Supreme Court scheduled a Public Hearing for April 8, 2008, 9:30 a.m..

'In the matter of the Creation of a Court Rule Authorizing Use of Electronic Signatures by Court Officials' (06-07)

Legislative Redistricting, Original Actions Procedure, submissions and conference schedule

While this court denied the petition for leave to commence an original action [Jensen v. Wisconsin Elections Board, 2002 WI 13, 249 Wis. 2d 706, 639 N.W.2d 537 (2002)], it stated that it would initiate proceedings regarding procedures for original jurisdiction in future redistricting cases. Accordingly, as a consequence of the Jensen petition and decision, on November 25, 2003, this court appointed a committee to review legislative redistricting, along with rules and procedures of other jurisdictions, and to propose procedural rules.

On September 21, 2007, the committee submitted its report and proposal...

In this January 4, 2008 order the Wisconsin Supreme Court set this schedule.

March 14, 2008 "any interested persons may file with the court a written submission for the court's review"

April 8, 2008, 9:30 a.m. open administrative conference

'In the matter of the adoption of procedures for original action cases involving state legislative redistricting' (02-03)

Amending Ch. 756 (Juries) hearing set

On January 3, 2008, A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts petitioned this court on behalf of the Committee of Chief Judges and the Chief Judge Subcommittee on Juror Treatment and Selection for an amendment to Chapter 756, of the Wisconsin Statutes relating to juries. The petition states that the goal of the rule petition "is to improve and clarify provisions governing the management of jurors in the circuit courts."

In this January 4, 2008 order the Wisconsin Supreme Court scheduled a Public Hearing for April 7, 2008, 9:45 a.m..

'In the matter of the Amendment of Rules of Pleading, Practice and Procedure: Wis. Stat. Ch. 756, Juries' (08-01)

Licensing Paralegals submissions and conference schedule

On February 13, 2004, the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Wisconsin filed a petition for the establishment of a system for licensure and regulation of paralegals in Wisconsin. A public hearing was conducted by the court on October 27, 2004, at which numerous persons appeared. At the ensuing open administrative conference, the court took the matter under advisement pending its determination of certain issues, including ramifications for the unauthorized practice of law, the court’s authority to regulate non-lawyers and other matters.

In a January 4, 2008 order the Wisconsin Supreme Court set this schedule.

March 7, 2008 "any interested persons may file with the court a written submission regarding the subjects identified for this conference"

April 7, 2008 9:45 a.m. open administrative conference

'In the matter of the Licensure and Regulation of Paralegals' (04-03)

Voluntary Dismissal sec. 809.18 amendment: hearing set

On November 27, 2007, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals by Chief Judge Richard S. Brown, filed a petition to amend Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.18 governing voluntary dismissals of cases on appeal and creating a subsection which requires the parties to immediately notify the court that the matter has been compromised or settled.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on January 4, 2008 ordered a Public Hearing in this matter for March 14, 2008, 9:30 a.m..

'In the matter of the Proposed Amendment to Wis. Stat. sec. (Rule) 809.18 (Voluntary Dismissal)' (07-15)

PPAC vice-chair hearing set

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on January 4, 2008 ordered a Public Hearing in this matter for March 14, 2008, 9:30 a.m..

'In the matter of the Amendment to SCR 70.14(2) formalizing vice-chairperson position on the Planning and Policy Advisory Committee (PPAC)' (07-14)

Definition of the Practice of Law: further conference set

There was a December 10, 2007 hearing in this matter.

Attorney Thomas R. Basting, Sr., President of the State Bar of Wisconsin, presented the petition to the court. Numerous interested persons appeared at the hearing or submitted written comments. At the ensuing administrative conference, the court discussed the matter and directed court staff to conduct certain research and to invite the various professional organizations that appeared in opposition to the petition to submit draft language to the court for its consideration.

The court on January 4, 2008 ordered that

March 14, 2008, at 9:30 a.m., at its open administrative conference in the Supreme Court Room in the State Capitol, Madison, Wisconsin, the court shall discuss this matter together with proposed amendments.

'In the matter of the Definition of the Practice of Law and the Administration of a Rule Defining the Practice of Law' (07-09)

This Week in Liberal Judicial Activism: Week of January 7, 2008

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos.

Mr. Whelan was the featured speaker at our chapter's March 8, 2007 luncheon.

Trial Lawyers Create Star Chamber Attempt to Shield Judges from their Record

The Wednesday Update at Wisconsin Club for Growth comments on our State Bar President Thomas Basting's Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee.

The Club is seconding one point made by Ed Garvey.

Basting appointed people with a variety of backgrounds and some rather narrow political diversity.

Two for the Show

Schutze withdraws from Supreme Court race leaving Butler, Gableman, by Jack Zemlicka, Wisconsin Law Journal

Hearings week of January 6th

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled hearings on the following petitions.

January 8, 2008

9:30 a.m. In re discretionary transfer of civil cases to tribal court filed 07/24/07 by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts (07-11)

9:30 a.m. In re videoconferencing use in the courts filed 09/04/2007 by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts (07-12)

January 9, 2008

9:30 a.m. open administrative conference In the Matter of the Petition of the State Bar of Wisconsin to Amend Chapter 20 of the Supreme Court Rules (06-06)

The Shark hits the Big Apple

Rick Esenberg reported late yesterday on the first day of the Federalist Society's annual Faculty Conference in New York City.

Court of Appeals opinions January 3, 2008

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals released these opinions.

It recommended for publication State v. Van Buren (2006AP3025-CR). Here's a summary by the Wisconsin Law Journal.

It did not recommend for publication State v. Barnes (2006AP2210-CR). Here's a summary by the Wisconsin Law Journal.

Commerce Clause follies

The federal statute making it a crime to sell a firearm to a felon is so ripe for a Commerce Clause challenge, I can taste it.

Judicial Conduct Panel recommends reprimand of Ziegler

David Ziemer at Wisconsin Law Journal

Update: Here are the panel's Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations.

Update 2: Briefing schedule

Update 3: Ziegler reprimand recommendation draws varied responses, by Jack Zemlicka, Wisconsin Law Journal, January 10, 2008

Chief Justice Abrahamson talks about court image

In The Capital Times

Abrahamson, 74, spoke with The Associated Press recently about money's influence -- or lack thereof -- on justices' campaigns and public perception.

(via WisPolitics)

January arguments and hearings

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled hearings or conferences on the following petitions.

January 8, 2008

9:30 a.m. In re discretionary transfer of civil cases to tribal court filed 07/24/07 by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts (07-11)

9:30 a.m. In re videoconferencing use in the courts filed 09/04/2007 by A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts (07-12)

January 9, 2008

9:30 a.m. open administrative conference In the Matter of the Petition of the State Bar of Wisconsin to Amend Chapter 20 of the Supreme Court Rules (06-06)


The Wisconsin Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the following.

January 15, 2008

9:45 a.m. James R. Donohoo v. Action Wisconsin, et al. (2006AP396)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10:45 a.m. Racine County, et al. v. Int'l Assoc. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (2006AP964)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1094) and Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser, et al. (2006AP1956)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

January 16, 2008

9:45 a.m. State v. Clayborn L. Walker (2006AP562-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10:45 a.m. State v. David G. Straszkowski (2006AP64-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. State v. Louis H. LaCount (2006AP672-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

January 17, 2007

9:45 a.m. Town of Madison v. County of Dane (2006AP2554)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

10: 45 a.m. Taneceia Larry v. Derrick L. Harris, et al. (2005AP2935)
(see earlier post on grant of review)

1:30 p.m. State v. Ronell E. Harris (2006AP882-CR)
(see earlier post on grant of review)


The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has scheduled oral argument in the following.

January 23, 2008 at Dist. II, 2727 North Grandview Blvd., Waukesha

9:30 a.m. Glenn Staege v. Town of Norway (2007AP0231)

Milwaukee Chapter officers, directors, and advisors

Officers

Rebecca Bradley, President
Daniel Kelly, Vice-president
Jonathan Koenig, Secretary and Treasurer
Terrence Berres, Webmaster


Directors

Donald A. Daugherty, Jr., and David W. Simon, Co-Chairmen;
Larry J. Bonney; Karl R. Dahlen; Kenneth A. Dortzbach; G. Michael Halfenger; Michael E. Hartmann; Thomas R. Hrdlick; Daniel Kelly; Jonathan H. Koenig; Paul D. Langer; Katherine Longley; Tim Lopez; Stephen D. Rogers; Theodore R. Rolfs; Luke Steffel; and David J. Tolan


Advisors (affiliations listed for identification purposes only)

James T. Barry, III, President, Colliers Barry, Milwaukee

Hon. Michael B. Brennan, Circuit Court, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin

Hon. John L. Coffey, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Dean Joseph D. Kearney, Marquette University Law School

Hon. Rudolph T. Randa, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

Thomas L. Shriner, Jr., Foley & Lardner

Hon. Diane Schwerm Sykes, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Prof. Christopher Wolfe, Marquette University

Continued from our former location