Right to public trial can be restricted if Sixth Amendment values preserved

Alex De Grand, State Bar of Wisconsin, February 26, 2009

See Decision in 'State v. Ndina' 2009 WI 21

Order on filing deadline for bar applications, 2009 WI 20

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 20, 2009 issued an order [html | pdf] effective June 1, 2009.


See Wisconsin Supreme Court adopts BBE petitions relating to noncompliance, suspension, reinstatement, and more


In the matter of amendment of Supreme Court Rule 40.14(2) regarding the filing of applications for admission and Supreme Court Rule 40.14(3)(h) regarding the fee for late application under the diploma privilege (08-14)

Order on manner of filing with BBE, 2009 WI 19

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 20, 2009 issued an order [html | pdf] effective June 1, 2009, repealing and recreating SCR 31.13 (2) to read:

31.13 (2) A report or other communication to the board under this chapter is timely filed if any of the following is applicable:

(a) The report or other communication, together with the applicable fees, is received at the board's office within the time specified for filing.

(b) The report or other communication, together with the applicable fees, is sent to the board's office through the United States Postal Service by 1st class mail, including express or priority mail, postage prepaid, and bears a postmark, other than a commercial postage meter label, showing that the communication was mailed on or before the last day for filing.

(c) The report or other communication, together with the applicable fees, is delivered on or before the last day for filing to a 3rd-party commercial carrier for delivery to the board's office within 3 calendar days.

See Wisconsin Supreme Court adopts BBE petitions relating to noncompliance, suspension, reinstatement, and more


In the matter of amendment of Supreme Court Rule 31.13(2) regarding the manner of filing documents relating to continuing legal education requirements (08-06)

Decision in 'Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Ginsberg' 2009 WI 18

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 16, 2009 issued its decision in this case (2007AP2351-D) dismissing OLR's complaint.

Decision in 'Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Sommers' 2009 WI 17

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 16, 2009 issued its decision in this case (2006AP2851-D) quashing the referee's order that OLR disclose its entire file, and remanding.

Decision in 'State v. Ndina' 2009 WI 21

The Wisconsin Supreme Court today issued its decision in this case (2007AP5-CR) affirming the Court of Appeals, 2007 WI App 268, in part and remanding.
Opinion by Chief Justice Abrahamson, with Justices Bradley, Crooks, and Roggensack
Concurrence by Justice Prosser, with Justices Ziegler and Gableman


Right to fair trial overrides interest in public trial, by David Ziemer, Wisconsin Law Journal, March 9, 2009


Right to public trial can be restricted if Sixth Amendment values preserved, by Alex De Grand, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin, February 26, 2009


See Argument in 'State v. Ndina'

I can guarantee

If Wisconsin repeals the Uniformity Clause, politicians will divide property owners into good guys and bad guys; then adopt variable tax rates that, through one dynamic or another, will retard putting property to its best use, to the ultimate detriment of the good guys the politicians claim they are helping.

Meeting of the Wisconsin Judicial Council November 20, 2009

Minutes.

Next scheduled meeting was January 15, 2010.

Court of Appeals opinions week of February 23, 2009

(linked from post title)


Wisconsin Law Journal current case digests

Review granted in 'State v. Artic'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 granted the petition to review the Court of Appeals decision, 2009 WI App 12, in this case (2008AP880-CR). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

In the warrantless invasion of the defendant’s curtilage, were the creation of claimed exigent circumstances and forced entry sufficiently attenuated from any illegality to render the defendant’s consent to search valid?

Should the Supreme Court adopt a per se rule barring the fruits of any search or seizure where police manufacture exigent circumstances?

Certification accepted in 'State v. Henley'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 accepted the Court of Appeals certification in this case (2008AP697-CR). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

Is the circuit court permitted to grant a new trial in the interest of justice under Wis. Stat. § 805.15(1) without time limit?

If it is not so permitted, does the circuit court have inherent authority to grant this relief?

If it does not, may the Court of Appeals use its power of discretionary reversal under Wis. Stat. §752.35 to reach back to the original judgment of conviction and grant the same relief?

If it may not, does the Court of Appeals have inherent authority to grant such relief?

If it does not, should the Supreme Court exercise its inherent authority to grant relief in this case?

Review granted in 'State v. Arends'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 granted the petition to review the Court of Appeals decision, 2008 WI App 184, in this case (2008AP52). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

Did the Court of Appeals correctly interpret legislative intent in adopting new language in Wis. Stat. § 980.09, “when it held that the standard for granting a discharge trial had not changed despite the legislature’s selection of language new and different from the language of repealed Wis. Stat. § 980.09(2)(2003-04)”?

Does Wis. Stat. § 980.09 allow a circuit court to deny a petition for discharge without a hearing if, after weighing all the information presented, it concludes that the petition has not alleged sufficient facts to support the conclusion that the petition showed a change in his condition or his dangerousness?

Review granted in 'State v. Fischer'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 granted the petition to review the Court of Appeals decision, 2008 WI App 152, in this case (2007AP1898-CR). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

Were the defendant’s constitutional rights to a defense, a fair trial, and due process violated when exculpatory expert opinions were excluded pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 343.303?

Under Wisconsin law, is the trial court empowered to keep out expert opinion evidence for “invalidity,” when the evidence is relevant and the expert properly qualified?

Decision in 'Blunt v. Medtronic, Inc.' 2009 WI 16

The Wisconsin Supreme Court today issued its decision in this case (2006AP1506) affirming the Court of Appeals, 2007 WI App 191.
Opinion by Justice Roggensack, with Justices Crooks, Prosser, Ziegler, and Gableman
Concurrence by Chief Justice Abrahamson, with Justice Bradley Justice Bradley, with Chief Justice Abrahamson


See Argument in 'Blunt v. Medtronic, Inc.'

Decision in 'Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Selmer' 2009 WI 15

The Wisconsin Supreme Court today issued its decision in this case (2008AP2868-D) accepting the OLR's recommendation of a public reprimanded "as reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the Minnesota Supreme Court".

Court of Appeals opinions week of February 16, 2009

(linked from post title)


Wisconsin Law Journal current case digests

Review granted in 'State v. Carroll'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 granted the petition to review the Court of Appeals decision, 2008 WI App 161, in this case (2007AP1378-CR). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

Was the trial court’s finding that the defendant was not under arrest at the time a police officer searched his cell phone incorrect as a matter of law where there is no evidence the defendant was told that he was under arrest and where the only undisputed basis for arrest was two non-criminal traffic violations (speeding and driving with a suspended license) and where the defendant had been handcuffed and placed in a squad car?

Where it would not be illegal to place a citizen under arrest for non-criminal traffic violations, may a police officer conduct a warrantless search of the memory of the citizen’s cell phone or other personal information device as part of a search incident to arrest?

If the warrantless search of the photo menu of the cell phone was invalid, was the subsequent search of the cell phone under warrant nevertheless lawful?

Review granted in 'Ehlinger v. Hauser'

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 10, 2009 granted the petition to review the Court of Appeals decision, 2008 WI App 123, in this case (2007AP477). The Table of Pending Cases (Updated February 12, 2009) [html | pdf] says the issues are:

Does Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 204 permit the trial court to supply a term to resolve an ambiguity that has no terms omitted and is not indefinite?

Do generally acceptable accounting principles (GAAP) require supporting documentation to determine book value?

May the trial court seek a professional opinion without following statutory due process requirements for either referees or court appointed experts?

Is the cross-petition’s challenge to the use of corporate assets to pay one shareholder’s litigation expenses independent of the petition’s challenge to the trial court’s contract interpretation and dissolution of the company of which the parties were shareholders?

Was the “special magistrate” appointed by the trial court as a referee or as an expert witness?

First, I felt sick

Then, I got really angry.

Supreme Court pending cases February 12, 2009

The Wisconsin Supreme Court posted an updated Table of Pending Cases [html | pdf]

Added recently accepted cases [Ehlinger v. Hauser] 07AP477, [State v. Carroll] 07AP1378-CR, [State v. Fischer] 07AP1898-CR, [State v. Arends] 08AP52, [State v. Henley] 08AP697-CR, and [State v. Artic] 08AP880-CR.

Robert Levy "The Dirty Dozen" February 18, 2009

Robert A. Levy will speak on the subject of his recent book The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom, co-authored by William Mellor, at a noon luncheon Wednesday, February 18, 2009, at the Milwaukee Athletic Club, 758 North Broadway.

Reservations may be made by printing and completing the registration form and mailing with $20.00 to Federalist Society, c/o Dan Kelly, Suite 1700, 1000 North Water Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202, for receipt on or before February 16, 2009. There will be a $25.00 charge at the door for those without reservations. Seating is limited. Refunds cannot be given to those who choose not to attend.

Presented by the Milwaukee Lawyers Chapter.

Mr. Levy was the featured speaker at our event "The D.C. Gun Ban in the Cross-Hairs" April 22, 2008.

Mr. Levy will also be speaking at events sponsored by the Marquette Student Chapter and University of Wisconsin Student Chapter. He will speak on his involvement in the District of Columbia v. Heller right to bear arms case February 17th at Noon in room 210 of the Marquette Law School. Lunch will be provided. On February 18th at 6:00 p.m. he will speak on "The Dirty Dozen" at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

Mr. Levy is senior fellow in constitutional studies and a member of the board of directors at the Cato Institute, which he joined in 1997 after 25 years in business. He also sits on boards of the Institute for Justice, the Federalist Society, and the George Mason University School of Law. He founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of financial information and software, and was its CEO until 1991. Levy clerked for Judge Royce C. Lamberth on the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., and for Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. From 1997 until 2004, Levy was an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University. He has written numerous articles on investments, law, and public policy. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Washington Post, National Review, and many other publications. Levy has also discussed public policy on national radio and TV programs, including ABC's Nightline, CNN's Crossfire, Fox's The O'Reilly Factor, MSNBC's Hardball, and NBC's Today Show. Levy received his Ph.D. in business from the American University and his J.D. degree from the George Mason University School of Law.

New world order: Supreme court considers rule to permit graduates of foreign law schools to take Wisconsin bar exam

Alex De Grand, State Bar of Wisconsin, reported, February 11, 2009, on the February 9th hearing and administrative conference.

James Huston, vice chair of the Board of Bar Examiners, explained that his organization sponsored the proposal in recognition of a world economy that increasingly brings immigrants with legal skills to Wisconsin.
[ ]
Justices identified areas of concern and directed the BBE to rework the draft rule.

And Jack Zemlicka reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 10, 2009, Supreme Court supports BBE discretion for foreign attorneys

See Supreme Court supports BBE discretion for foreign attorneys

In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.055 Relating to Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations (08-09)

Federal court rules minimum mark-up law unconstitutional

WisPolitics notes U.S. District Court Rudolph Randa's decision and order yesterday in Flying J, Inc., v. Van Hollen (E.D. Wis. 08C110) holding Wis. Stat. sec. 100.30 (the "Unfair Sales Act") violates the Sherman Act.

Supreme court ponders rule to permit foreign lawyers limited practice in Wisconsin

Alex De Grand, State Bar of Wisconsin, reported, February 11, 2009, on the February 9th hearing and administrative conference. The petition asks the court to

permit a foreign lawyer to offer advice on international law in Wisconsin as a “registered legal consultant.” James Huston, vice-chair of the Board of Bar Examiners, spoke on behalf of this rule change sponsored by his organization. Huston said there is a great need in the modern global economy for these services among Wisconsin businesses expanding into overseas markets and immigrants seeking counsel on legal issues arising in their countries of origin.

Justices identified areas of concern and directed the BBE to rework the draft rule.

And Jack Zemlicka reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 11, 2009, Court considers questions about foreign legal consultants

See Hearing on Authorizing Registered Legal Consultants

In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.056 Authorizing Registered Legal Consultants (08-08)

Apostle of administrative law

So called by Joseph A. Ranney in his series on Wisconsin's Legal History in Wisconsin Lawyer magazine, Marvin B. Rosenberry was born on this date in 1868. He was first elected a justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 1918, and was Chief Justice from 1929 to 1950.

Mr. Ranney characterizes Justice Rosenberry as advancing the position that administrative agencies' power is not "merely the implementation of the Legislature's policies, [rather] he argued that courts should recognize and accept the reality that agencies had independent powers". This view he embodied in his opinion for the court State ex rel. Wisconsin Inspection Bureau v. Whitman, 196 Wis. 472, 220 N.W. 929 (1928) on the validity of a statute empowering the state insurance commissioner to veto rules adopted by the state Rating Bureau.

Judicial election campaign season tends to be the time we hear most about about the separation of powers among the three branches of goverment. As to the tripartite structure, Ranney puts Justice Rosenberry's views this way.

Agencies, he said, must be recognized as a fourth branch of government, vested with separate powers that the 20th century had made necessary.

Justice Rosenberry also noted the concern about the lack of separation of powers within an agency, Whitman, 220 N.W. at 937, but included in his reassurance,

The doors of the courts of this country will always stand open to any citizen complaining that he has been deprived of his constitutional rights, no matter under what form of law the deprivation has been worked.

Whitman, 220 N.W. at 942. That might be less reassuring considering what he wrote the following year, quoted by Ranney.

"[T]hose who have opposed the creation and extension of administrative tribunals have as a rule had the best of the argument on legal and constitutional grounds, but have been obliged to yield to an irresistible social pressure. ...

Administrative Law and the Constitution, 23 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 32, 34-35 (1929).

Supreme Court supports BBE discretion for foreign attorneys

Jack Zemlicka, Wisconsin Law Journal, February 10, 2009

the court voted 5-2 to approve an interim rule encouraging the Board of Bar Examiners to grant special waivers to qualified foreign-trained attorneys who want the opportunity to practice law in the state.

See Hearing on Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations

In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.055 Relating to Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations (08-09)

Court of Appeals opinions week of February 9, 2009

(linked from post title)


Wisconsin Law Journal current case digests

BOG member concerned about president-elect

Jack Zemlicka reported in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 5, 2009

In an e-mail sent to [State Bar] Executive Director George S. Brown on Jan. 26, board [State Bar Board of Governors] member Thomas Heine suggested that Kammer’s [State Bar President-elect Douglas Kammer] active lobbying for a voluntary bar is a conflict of interest and inconsistent with the duties of an officer of the bar.

Court clarifies community caretaker capacity

David Ziemer reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal, February 9, 2009

See Decision in 'State v. Kramer' 2009 WI 14

Incumbent Protection

The State Bar is supporting a Senate Bill to use taxpayer dollars to finance state Supreme Court races, and is urging "other Wisconsin residents" to support their efforts to protect incumbents.

They may consider this post an emphatic "no."

UIM recovery limited to covered autos

David Ziemer, Wisconsin Law Journal, February 2, 2009

See Decision in 'Lisowski v. Hastings Mutual Insurance Company' 2009 WI 11

Hearing on Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations

Pending Rules Petitions (updated January 21, 2009) Scheduled For Public Hearing, including:

February 9, 2009 9:45 a.m. In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.055 Relating to Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations (08-09)
See Hearing and Conference on admission of graduates of foreign law schools February 9, 2009.

Hearing on Authorizing Registered Legal Consultants

Pending Rules Petitions (updated January 21, 2009) Scheduled For Public Hearing, including:

February 9, 2009 9:45 a.m. In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.056 Authorizing Registered Legal Consultants (08-08)
See Hearing and Conference on Registered Legal Consultants February 9, 2009.

Thank you

Sending a huge thank you to Professor Randy Barnett for a wonderfully thrilling presentation at Chicago-Loyola yesterday on why Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905), was correctly decided, and to Jacki, the chapter president, for being such a gracious hostess to a provincial attorney visiting the big city.

Supreme Court: Cheerleading is a contact sport

David Ziemer, Wisconsin Law Journal, January 30, 2009

See Decision in 'Noffke v. Bakke' 2009 WI 10

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates Shirley Abrahamson, Randy Koschnick target one another's pasts

Malavika Jagannathan reported in the January 30, 2009 Appleton Post-Crescent on the January 29, 2009 debate. (via The Wheeler Report)

Statutory history part of statute’s plain meaning

David Ziemer, Wisconsin Law Journal, January 30, 2009

See Decision in 'County of Dane v. Labor and Industry Review Commission' 2009 WI 9

Argument in 'Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Molinaro'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 5, 2009 1:30 p.m. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Molinaro (2007AP869-D)

Police “caretaker function” cures Fourth Amendment violation, Wisconsin Supreme Court says

Alex De Grand, State Bar of Wisconsin, January 30, 2009

See Decision in 'State v. Kramer' 2009 WI 14

Argument in 'Nedvidek v. Kuipers'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 5, 2009 10:45 a.m. Nedvidek v. Kuipers (2006AP3075)
See Review granted in 'Nedvidek v. Kuipers' and Synopsis of 'Nedvidek v. Kuipers'.

Argument in 'Ho-Chunk Nation v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 5, 2009 9:45 a.m. Ho-Chunk Nation v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue (2007AP1985)
See Review granted in 'Ho-Chunk Nation v. Department of Revenue' and Synopsis of 'Ho-Chunk Nation v. Department of Revenue'.

Court of Appeals opinions week of February 2, 2009

(linked from post title)


Wisconsin Law Journal current case digests

Abrahamson, Koschnick spar over court decisions

Greg Bump reported January 30, 2009 at WisPolitics on the January 29, 2009 debate.

Argument in 'Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 4, 2009 1:30 p.m. Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc. (2008AP1913-CQ)
See Certification accepted in 'Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.' and Synopsis of 'Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.'.

Argument in 'Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co.'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 4, 2009 10:45 a.m. Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co. (2007AP385)
See Review granted in 'Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co.' and Synopsis of 'Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co.'.

Argument in 'City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 4, 2009 9:45 a.m. City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee (2006AP2866)
See Review granted in 'City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee' and Synopsis of 'City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee'.

Court of Appeals opinions week of February 2, 2009

(linked from post title)


Wisconsin Law Journal current case digests

Opponent accuses Wisconsin Supreme Court chief justice of making law

Todd Richmond of the Associated Press reported January 30, 2009, in the Wisconsin State Journal on the January 29, 2009 debate. (via The Wheeler Report)

Argument in 'Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 3, 2009 1:30 p.m. Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha (2007AP1198)
See Review granted in 'Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha' and Synopsis of 'Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha'.

If cheerleading is a contact sport, then fetch me a sled

Mike Nichols in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, January 30, 2009

See Decision in 'Noffke v. Bakke' 2009 WI 10

Road Trip?

Anyone interested in carpooling to Chicago on Thursday to see Randy Barnett speak on Lochner? 4 p.m. at Loyola.
david.ziemer@wislawjournal.com
414-225-1820

Argument in 'Horst v. Deere & Company'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 3, 2009 10:45 a.m. Horst v. Deere & Company (2006AP2933)
See Review granted in 'Horst v. Deere & Company' and Synopsis of 'Horst v. Deere & Company'.

Argument in 'Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company'

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf] including:

February 3, 2009 9:45 a.m. Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company (2007AP541)
See Review granted in 'Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company' and Synopsis of 'Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company'.

Koschnick says Chief Justice Abrahamson favors criminal defendants

Steven Walters reported in the January 30, 2009 Milwuakee Journal Sentinel on the January 29, 2009 debate. (via Illusory Tenant)

Argument assigned for February 2009

On January 9 the Wisconsin Supreme Court published an updated oral argument Assignment for the Month of February 2009 [html | pdf].

February 3, 2009

9:45 a.m. Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company (2007AP541)
See Review granted in 'Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company' and Synopsis of 'Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company'.

10:45 a.m. Horst v. Deere & Company (2006AP2933)
See Review granted in 'Horst v. Deere & Company' and Synopsis of 'Horst v. Deere & Company'.

1:30 p.m. Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha (2007AP1198)
See Review granted in 'Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha' and Synopsis of 'Kenosha Professional Firefighters v. City of Kenosha'.

February 4, 2009

9:45 a.m. City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee (2006AP2866)
See Review granted in 'City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee' and Synopsis of 'City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee'.

10:45 a.m. Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co. (2007AP385)
See Review granted in 'Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co.' and Synopsis of 'Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co.'.

1:30 p.m. Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc. (2008AP1913-CQ)
See Certification accepted in 'Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.' and Synopsis of 'Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.'.

February 5, 2009

9:45 a.m. Ho-Chunk Nation v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue (2007AP1985)
See Review granted in 'Ho-Chunk Nation v. Department of Revenue' and Synopsis of 'Ho-Chunk Nation v. Department of Revenue'.

10:45 a.m. Nedvidek v. Kuipers (2006AP3075)
See Review granted in 'Nedvidek v. Kuipers' and Synopsis of 'Nedvidek v. Kuipers'.

1:30 p.m. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Molinaro (2007AP869-D)


Pending Rules Petitions (updated January 21, 2009) Scheduled For Public Hearing:

February 9, 2009

9:45 a.m. In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.056 Authorizing Registered Legal Consultants (08-08)
Hearing and Conference on Registered Legal Consultants February 9, 2009

9:45 a.m. In the Matter of the Petition to Create Supreme Court Rule SCR 40.055 Relating to Admitting Graduates of Law Schools in Other Nations (08-09)
Hearing and Conference on admission of graduates of foreign law schools February 9, 2009