This case concerns whether a defendant convicted in Wisconsin of first-degree reckless endangerment should receive credit on his concurrent Wisconsin sentence for time spent in presentence custody in Illinois on an unrelated armed robbery charge. The Wisconsin Supreme Court modified the court of appeals' decision, awarding the defendant 305 days of sentence credit rather than 324 days. The court interpreted Wis. Stat. § 973.155(1)(a) to require credit for all days in custody connected to the Wisconsin offense, determining based on the timing of the Wisconsin detainer that the Illinois custody was connected for only part of the period claimed. The decision clarifies the application of the sentence credit statute in cases involving concurrent sentences from different states.
This case concerned whether Justice Michael J. Gableman's campaign advertisement violated the Wisconsin judicial conduct rule prohibiting misrepresentation of facts about an opponent. The Supreme Court, equally divided, rejected the panel's recommendation to grant summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Three justices found that the ad knowingly misrepresented a fact regarding an opponent's record and was not protected by the First Amendment, while the other three disagreed; as a result, the case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
The case Phillips v. U.S. Bank, N.A. came before the Supreme Court of Wisconsin as a petition for review. The court granted the petition for review, allowing the underlying dispute to proceed to full consideration by the state's highest court. Chief Justice Abrahamson and Justice Ziegler did not participate in the decision on the petition.
Roehl Transport, a trucking company insured by Liberty Mutual under a policy with a $500,000 deductible and $2 million limit, sued its insurer for bad faith in handling a third-party personal injury lawsuit arising from a truck accident. The underlying case resulted in a jury verdict of $830,400 against Roehl, which fell within policy limits but exhausted the deductible. The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an insured with a high deductible may bring a bad faith claim against its insurer even when the judgment does not exceed policy limits, because the insurer controls settlement decisions that can harm the insured. The court found sufficient evidence supported the jury's bad faith determination and damages award, ruled that public policy did not bar the claim, and held that attorney fees are recoverable as a matter of law upon a bad faith finding, while affirming denial of punitive damages.
The case State v. Mosay was a criminal matter that reached the Wisconsin Supreme Court on a petition for review. On May 13, 2010, the court denied the petition, leaving the lower court's decision in place. Chief Justice Abrahamson dissented from the denial of review, and Justice Gableman did not participate.
The case involved a petition by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals to the state Supreme Court seeking certification of an appeal in State v. Harris. The Supreme Court refused the petition for certification. Chief Justice Abrahamson concurred in the refusal but indicated that the court should have provided reasons for declining to take the case.
