Thomas Cane

This case involved a medical malpractice lawsuit brought by Dale Otto's estate and family against two doctors, their clinic, and their insurer Physicians Insurance Company of Wisconsin (PIC) after Otto died from cancer that the doctors allegedly failed to diagnose properly. PIC was served with the complaint but its attorney filed an answer more than a year late, leading the trial court to strike the answer, enter a default judgment against PIC on both liability and damages, and dismiss the other defendants without offsetting amounts paid by a subrogated insurer. The appeals court affirmed the default judgment, holding there was no excusable neglect and that PIC was liable for the full damages amount once the other parties were dismissed, but reversed on the offset issue because the statute of limitations had run on the subrogation claim, entitling PIC to a reduction of $42,635.26. The court remanded for adjustment of the judgment totaling $972,469.81.

proceduretorts & liability

In State v. Vanness, the defendant was convicted after a jury trial on charges of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (fifth offense) and related offenses, during which the courthouse doors were locked at 4:30 p.m. pursuant to county policy, denying public access—including to the defendant's wife—during the entire presentation of the defense and the state's rebuttal. The court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial, holding that the closure violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial (incorporated against the states via the Fourteenth Amendment). The core reasoning was that this fundamental right, rooted in ensuring fairness, accountability of judges and prosecutors, and public confidence in the judicial system, may be overcome only if the four-part Press-Enterprise test is satisfied or the closure is trivial, neither of which applied here despite the limited duration and lack of awareness by the jury.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

This case involved a dispute over whether a Wisconsin nursing home participating in the Medicaid program could obtain full reimbursement for legal fees it incurred defending against state and federal deficiency citations. The Department of Health and Family Services allowed only partial reimbursement for fees from the state proceeding and none from the federal proceeding, based on annual expense caps in the Methods of Implementation for Wisconsin Medicaid Nursing Home Payment Rates and limits on allowable costs. The circuit court ordered full reimbursement for the state fees and remanded the federal fees for further review, but the Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the Department correctly applied the rate-calculation rules, including cost-center maximums that prevented most of the fees from being reimbursed in the applicable years. The court rejected arguments for adjusting rates due to changes in the Methods or other exceptions, finding no basis to alter the reimbursement calculations.

healthcarebusiness & regulatory

The Village of Hobart sued the Oneida Tribe and others seeking a declaration of interests in a former railroad right-of-way under Wis. Stat. ch. 841, asserting that its municipal powers to condemn, tax, assess, and zone the land qualified as an "interest in real property." The circuit court dismissed the action, and the court of appeals affirmed. The court held that Wis. Stat. § 840.01 defines "interest in real property" to cover only property rights such as estates, easements, liens, and covenants, not governmental regulatory powers, which are excluded along with interests held merely as a member of the public. The opinion reasoned that the statutory text, context, and enumerated examples all refer to property interests rather than regulatory authority, and noted that the Village could pursue its concerns through other procedures such as assessment collection suits.

propertyprocedure

In Canadian National Railroad v. Noel, a railroad company and related parties sued the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) for negligence in the planning, building, and maintenance of a railroad crossing intersection after a 2000 train-truck collision. The DOT moved to dismiss the claims on grounds of sovereign immunity, arguing lack of express legislative consent to suit. The court affirmed the dismissal, concluding that the DOT is not an "independent going concern" exempt from immunity because it was not created as a body corporate or politic and lacks a broad "sue and be sued" statutory authorization, with only narrow statutory consents (such as in condemnation or contract actions) that do not cover tort claims. Sovereign immunity under the Wisconsin Constitution is treated as a jurisdictional bar that applies to state agencies absent clear legislative waiver.

proceduretorts & liability

The case concerned landowners Norman and Stuart Herro who sued the Village of McFarland and Town of Dunn, alleging that a joint committee formed to negotiate boundary and annexation issues violated Wisconsin's open meetings law by holding closed sessions. The circuit court granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the court of appeals affirmed. The appellate court held that the closed portions of the meetings were permissible under the statutory exemption in Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(e) for competitive or bargaining reasons, as the Town was negotiating a property purchase and sought to avoid undermining its position. The court further noted that even assuming a violation, the balancing test under Wis. Stat. § 19.97(3) favored upholding the resulting intermunicipal agreement because extensive public notice, hearings, and input had occurred afterward and the agreement advanced cooperative land-use planning encouraged by statute.

procedure