Whether the statute of limitations tolling provision of Wis. Stat. §939.74(1) (1966 – 69) for any time when the defendant “was not publicly a resident within the state,” as applied to this case, violated either the defendant’s right to equal protection and due process or the privileges and immunity clauses of the United States Constitution.Synopsis at Supreme Court Calendar and Case Synopses January 2010
Whether a 36-year delay in filing criminal charges violates a defendant’s right to due process in relation to the statute of limitations.
Whether reversal in the interests of justice under Wis. Stat. §751.06 due to the delay in filing charges is an appropriate remedy.
McGuire ruling could open doors for appeals, by Pedro Oliveira, Jr., Janesville Gazette
10:45 a.m. Sands v. Menard, Inc. (2008AP1703) review of the Court of Appeals decision, 2009 WI App 70, 767 N.W.2d 332, on the issue:
Must an employer/client’s right to choose its general counsel yield to an arbitration award for reinstatement when neither the employer/client nor its former employee/general counsel had requested that remedy and when the attorney-client relationship is irretrievably broken?Synopsis at Supreme Court Calendar and Case Synopses January 2010
Oral arguments set in Menard discrimination case, by The Associated Press, LaCrosse Tribune (via WisPolitics)
The Odd Couple: Justices to consider arbitration award reinstating lawyer when lawyer and client don’t get along, by Alex De Grand, State Bar of Wisconsin
1:30 p.m. Admanco, Inc. v. 700 Stanton Drive, LLC (2007AP2791) review of the Court of Appeals decision, 2009 WI App 57, 768 N.W.2d 32, on the issues:
Is a beneficiary of a letter of credit from a bank which holds a general business security agreement on all of the debtor’s property a “secured creditor” as that term is defined under Wis. Stat. §128.25(1) and therefore outside the purview of Wis. Stat. ch. 128?Synopsis at Supreme Court Calendar and Case Synopses January 2010
Is there a violation of the “independence principle” of Wis. Stat. §405.103 and common law governing letters of credit in allowing an action against the beneficiary of a letter of credit arising out of the issuer’s enforcement of its security interest against the debtor’s estate?