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

The case involved a surgeon, Hans Rechsteiner, who sued Spooner Health System, its board members, administrator, and the Hazelden clinic for negligence, malpractice, and defamation after a peer review process triggered by an on-call snowmobiling incident where alcohol was detected. Rechsteiner was referred for alcohol assessment and treatment at Hazelden, during which allegedly defamatory statements were made by hospital personnel, and he claimed the process caused unnecessary inpatient treatment and reputational harm. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the defendants and denied Rechsteiner's request for a continuance to conduct further discovery. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that Wisconsin Stat. § 146.37(1g) provided statutory immunity for good-faith participation in the review or evaluation of a health care provider's services, which encompassed the Hazelden assessment as part of the hospital's quality-control process, and that the trial court reasonably exercised its discretion in denying the continuance given the timing and lack of diligence shown.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability

The case involved the Estate of Steven Newgard appealing an order allowing Bank of America and Discover Financial to recover credit card debts from the estate. The court reversed the order and directed that claims be disallowed to the extent they relied on transactions not shown in the banks' provided statements. The core reasoning was that Wis. Stat. § 425.109(2) requires creditors in consumer credit transactions under open-end credit plans to submit writings evidencing any transaction upon which the claim is based, so that consumers can evaluate claims without extensive discovery, and this rule applies regardless of the legal theory asserted by the creditor.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved Troy Westphal being cited for fishing with an unattended line under Wis. Admin. Code § NR 20.06 while ice fishing on Lake Metonga using tip-ups. The circuit court dismissed the charge after finding that Westphal's practice of checking the lines approximately every hour did not violate the regulation. On appeal, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, concluding that Westphal's lines were unattended because he was out of sight unloading wood for over an hour and thus unable to immediately respond to a bite. The court interpreted the code's definition of an unattended line and the prima facie evidence provision as requiring anglers to be positioned to respond promptly, and it directed the circuit court on remand to find Westphal guilty and impose the appropriate fine.

criminal lawenvironmentbusiness & regulatory

In State v. Hartwig, the State of Wisconsin appealed a trial court's order suppressing evidence found in John Hartwig's truck during a search by Department of Natural Resources wardens, which the lower court had ruled involuntary due to a prior seizure. The appellate court reversed the suppression order and remanded the case, holding that the trial court incorrectly applied precedent from State v. Jones by concluding that custody alone invalidated the consent. The court reasoned that under the totality of the circumstances, including Hartwig's active assistance in the search and lack of coercion, his consent was voluntary despite the seizure, consistent with established Fourth Amendment principles that custody by itself does not render consent involuntary.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved David Fohr seeking partition or a sheriff's sale of a parcel of land jointly owned with his siblings, Gerald Fohr and Sally Kania, which they inherited under their father's will. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the siblings, denying David's request on the grounds that partition would violate the will's restriction limiting sales of shares to the other heirs at a 1973 appraised value. On appeal, the court affirmed, reasoning that the will imposed a valid restriction on partition that could be implied from the testator's intent for the property to remain intact among the children, and that equity prevented David from benefiting from the will's terms to acquire one share cheaply while seeking to disregard them for his own benefit.

propertyfamily law

Brian Jacobs, a felon and member of the Stockbridge-Munsee tribe, was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm under Wis. Stat. § 941.29 after an officer saw him hunting with a muzzle-loading firearm on tribal reservation land. Jacobs moved to dismiss, claiming the state lacked jurisdiction because the charge infringed on treaty-protected tribal hunting rights under an 1856 treaty and 18 U.S.C. § 1162(b). The circuit court denied the motion, Jacobs pled no contest, and he appealed. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that 18 U.S.C. § 1162(a) grants the state criminal jurisdiction over offenses by Indians in Indian country and that § 941.29 is a generally applicable neutral criminal statute rather than a hunting regulation, so its enforcement does not deprive treaty rights but instead results incidentally from Jacobs's own prior felony conviction.

criminal lawfederal powerguns

This case involved a dispute over which state court had jurisdiction to decide custody of a newborn child under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, as adopted in Wisconsin. Tanya Hatch moved to Wisconsin while pregnant, gave birth there, and filed a custody action in Wisconsin shortly after the birth, while her husband had already filed for divorce and custody in Idaho. The Wisconsin circuit court dismissed the action, concluding that Idaho had jurisdiction because of the pending divorce proceeding. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Wisconsin was the child's home state since she had lived there from birth with a parent, giving Wisconsin initial jurisdiction under the Act's home-state priority rule, and remanded for further proceedings in Wisconsin.

family law

This case involved a dispute between adjacent property owners John Kosir and Paul Spencer over an easement recorded since 1936 that provided Spencer access across Kosir's land for road purposes. Spencer sought a court declaration confirming the easement's validity and determining its location and width after Kosir refused to allow construction of a logging road. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Spencer, ruling that the easement had not been abandoned despite decades of nonuse and establishing a twenty-foot-wide easement with a twelve-foot road along the eastern edge of Kosir's property. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that mere nonuse does not establish abandonment under Wisconsin law and that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in fixing the easement's location and dimensions based on the parties' interests and the recorded language granting a right of way for road purposes.

property

This case involves a dispute over liability insurance coverage following a motorcycle accident in which a passenger was injured due to alleged negligence by both the owner and the driver, who were both insured under a Progressive Casualty Insurance policy with a $25,000 per person limit. The circuit court ruled that both insureds were entitled to the full $25,000 limit each, for a total of $50,000. Progressive argued that Wisconsin's anti-stacking statute, Wis. Stat. § 632.32(5)(f), limited its total liability to $25,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's order, holding that the anti-stacking provision applies only to multiple vehicles or policies and does not override the omnibus statute's requirement that all insureds receive equal coverage under a single policy covering one vehicle.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

In State v. LaCount, the defendant appealed his convictions for theft by a bailee and securities fraud arising from his employment at a debt negotiation firm, where he was accused of misappropriating client funds and engaging in an unlawful investment scheme involving real estate. LaCount challenged the execution of a search warrant at his workplace that yielded evidence of additional crimes, the admission of expert testimony on investment contracts, the sufficiency of evidence to support the securities fraud conviction, and the use of his prior convictions to enhance his sentence as a habitual criminal without a jury finding. The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the search was properly limited to the warrant's scope given the complex nature of the alleged fraud scheme, that expert testimony was admissible, that sufficient evidence existed to establish an investment contract, and that the repeater enhancement could be determined from the existing judicial record without violating the right to a jury trial.

criminal lawprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved a dispute over whether Rose Thom's negligence claim against OneBeacon Insurance, as Jean Thom's liability insurer, was barred by the statute of limitations following a car accident. The circuit court had denied summary judgment to OneBeacon, finding the limitations period was tolled during arbitration of underinsured motorist benefits claims. On appeal, the court reversed, holding that the arbitration of the UIM claim did not toll the statute of limitations for the new negligence claim under Wis. Stat. § 631.83(5), that the amended complaint did not relate back to the original filing, and that it was not permissible as an amendment to conform to the evidence. The decision was based on statutory interpretation distinguishing first-party from third-party claims and the timing of the amended complaint filed after the three-year limitations period had expired.

proceduretorts & liability

This case involved Accent Developers appealing the City of Menomonie Board of Zoning Appeals' decision to grant Timber Ridge Homes a variance allowing two duplexes that were built within the required front setback. The circuit court affirmed the board's decision, and the Court of Appeals also affirmed. The court reasoned that the hardship was not solely self-created due to the city inspector's approval of the footings without detecting the violation, and that demolishing the structures would impose an unnecessary hardship exceeding $100,000. It applied precedents allowing variances where strict enforcement would be burdensome and the issue was unique to the property.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case was a coverage dispute in which Brown County sought reimbursement from its insurer OHIC for a $100,000 self-insured retention payment the County made under a separate policy with WMMIC to settle a wrongful-death lawsuit arising from a patient's death at a county facility. Both policies provided primary coverage for the underlying claim, but the OHIC policy contained an "other insurance" clause. The circuit court granted summary judgment to OHIC, ruling that the self-insured retention constituted "other insurance" that had to be exhausted first. The court of appeals reversed, holding that the OHIC policy was ambiguous on whether self-insurance qualified as "other insurance" because the term was undefined, and therefore construed the policy in favor of coverage so that OHIC was required to reimburse the $100,000.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

This case arose after a fire destroyed the Mullers' sporting goods store; their insurer, Society Insurance, paid over $400,000 in benefits and later reached a $190,000 subrogation settlement with the tortfeasor's million-dollar liability policy, while the Mullers separately settled their claims for $120,000. The trial court awarded the Mullers $59,725.60 from Society's subrogation recovery after finding they had not been made whole. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed, holding that an insurer may retain its subrogation settlement when policy limits are ample, the insured had the first opportunity to recover full losses, and the insured voluntarily settled for less. The court distinguished prior precedents like Garrity and Rimes, which barred subrogation only where funds were demonstrably insufficient to make the insured whole. The Mullers' cross-appeal seeking Society's entire subrogation amount was also rejected.

torts & liabilityproperty