William Eich

In State v. Revels, the defendant, charged with causing death by the intoxicated use of a vehicle, appealed an interlocutory order requiring disclosure to the prosecution of a written summary of his expert witness's findings and anticipated testimony under Wis. Stat. § 971.23(2m)(am). Revels argued the statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, infringing his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment rights to counsel and to present a defense, and alternatively that the order exceeded the statute's requirements. The court reviewed the challenges de novo, presuming the statute's constitutionality, and held that because the provision is procedural rather than substantive it is not subject to vagueness analysis. It further concluded that disclosure of an expert's non-privileged findings does not compel the defendant to incriminate himself or waive work-product protections, which lack constitutional dimension here, and that the order complied with the statute's terms. The court therefore affirmed the discovery order.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned maternal grandparents Elgin and Carol W. who petitioned for custody, guardianship, and visitation of their grandson Jeffrey after his biological parents' rights were terminated in a prior proceeding and he was placed in foster care leading to adoption. The trial court dismissed the petitions, and the Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that the termination of parental rights and adoption barred statutory claims for custody and guardianship as a matter of law. The court also rejected the grandparents' equitable visitation claim under Holtzman v. Knott because they had not established a parental-like relationship meeting the required factors, and it found no violation of their constitutional rights. The adoption by the child's foster parents was approved during the proceedings.

family lawcivil rights

This case involved a dispute over whether DEC International was obligated to reimburse Insurance Company of North America (INA) for a payment INA's affiliate made on a performance bond guaranteeing a Danish subsidiary's construction contract for a whey processing plant. DEC had sent a letter agreeing to indemnify CIGNA (INA's affiliate) for demands on the bond, but refused payment after the bond was called due to alleged performance failures, leading INA to sue for the amount paid. The trial court found the letter constituted an indemnity agreement and entered judgment for INA. The appeals court affirmed, holding that the trial court's finding on the parties' intent was not clearly erroneous, that INA had adequately investigated before paying, and that business compulsion justified the payment under suretyship principles. The court rejected DEC's argument that the letter was merely a collateral deposit provision enforceable only by specific performance.

business & regulatory

The case involved property owners suing a neighbor, a town, and a county for damage to their land from flooding allegedly caused by pumping water and building dikes in 1993. The trial court dismissed the suit because the owners did not file a notice of claim within the 90 days required by the pre-1994 version of Wisconsin Statute § 88.87(2)(c). The appellate court reversed, holding that the 1994 amendment extending the filing period to three years is procedural in nature and thus applies retroactively to claims from before the amendment.

propertyproceduretorts & liability

This case involved the State appealing a circuit court order suppressing evidence of cocaine found on Albert Amos during a police stop in a prosecution for possession with intent to deliver. The circuit court had ruled that officers lacked reasonable suspicion to detain Amos after observing what appeared to be an aborted drug transaction in a high-crime parking lot known for drug activity and marked with a no-trespassing sign. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the officers had sufficient specific and articulable facts—including the area's reputation for open-air drug sales, a woman's approach to Amos's car followed by her quick retreat upon noticing police, and Amos's immediate departure—to justify an investigatory stop under the Fourth Amendment. The decision rested on the totality of circumstances supporting a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, consistent with standards from Terry v. Ohio, allowing the evidence to be admitted at trial.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether Tri-County Trails Commission, which maintains a recreational trail on a former railroad right-of-way, must erect fencing along the trail under Wis. Stat. § 192.33 to protect adjacent property owners. The circuit court issued a declaratory judgment requiring the fencing, but the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute imposes no such obligation. The court reasoned that the plain language of § 192.33 requires fencing only by those "operating" a railroad, that Tri-County Trails was not operating a railroad, and that prior circuit-court statements on the fencing issue did not trigger issue preclusion because they were not necessary to the earlier dismissal. The matter was remanded for dismissal of the owners' claims.

propertyprocedure

Theresa Duello, a tenured associate professor at the University of Wisconsin Medical School, sued the Board of Regents alleging gender discrimination in compensation under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. The circuit court dismissed the Title IX claim on summary judgment and allowed amendment to add an Equal Pay Act claim, on which a jury found a willful violation and awarded back pay, liquidated damages, a salary increase, attorney fees, and costs. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, concluding that Title VII supplies the exclusive federal private remedy for employment-related gender discrimination and that Title IX does not create a private right of action in the employment context. It also affirmed the attorney fee award as a reasonable exercise of discretion and upheld the costs allocation under the offer-of-judgment statute.

labor & employmentcivil rights

The case involved Michael Becker, who was injured in a single-car accident while riding as a passenger with Ryan Holzhueter, after the boys had stolen alcohol from a gas station during a joyride without licenses. Becker sued 1st Auto, the insurer for Holzhueter's parents, seeking coverage under the auto policy. The court affirmed the judgment for Becker, holding that public policy under the principle of fortuity did not bar coverage despite the criminal activity. The core reasoning was that the injuries stemmed from reckless driving, not intentional acts like assault or murder, making coverage consistent with the reasonable expectations of the parties and with a statute prohibiting exclusions for reckless vehicle use; the case was distinguished from precedents involving sexual assault or murder-suicide and aligned with a case involving juveniles playing with fire.

criminal lawtorts & liability

Michael Sveum was convicted of stalking, harassment, violating a harassment injunction, and criminal damage to property based on a series of actions targeting his former girlfriend, including repeated phone calls, following her, damaging vehicles of her dates, and other contacts over several months in 1994-1996. Sveum appealed, claiming the trial court wrongly excluded exculpatory testimony as hearsay and that evidence was insufficient to support the stalking and harassment convictions. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding that the excluded statements did not qualify under the state-of-mind hearsay exception and that a reasonable jury could find the elements of the crimes met, including that Sveum's acts induced fear and involved a course of conduct with visual or physical proximity on multiple days. The court interpreted the stalking statute to allow a single act inducing fear to suffice when part of the required course of conduct.

criminal law

In State v. Griffin, John Griffin was convicted of marijuana possession, cocaine possession, and bail jumping after a search of an apartment turned up marijuana blunts, drug paraphernalia, cash, and urine and blood tests positive for controlled substances; he appealed the convictions and the denial of postconviction relief, arguing insufficient evidence and various trial errors. The court reversed the cocaine possession conviction because no cocaine was found in the apartment and the evidence did not prove possession beyond a reasonable doubt, but affirmed the marijuana possession and bail jumping convictions on grounds that the evidence, including the odor on Griffin, the blunts, and his violation of bail conditions, was sufficient. The court also rejected Griffin's claims regarding probable cause for arrest, severance of charges, jury instructions, admission of evidence, and a new trial in the interests of justice, concluding that any errors were harmless. The case was remanded to vacate the cocaine conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

Telemark Development, Inc. appealed a Tax Appeals Commission decision that its sales of flexible time-share interests in a Wisconsin condominium resort were subject to sales tax under Wis. Stat. § 77.52(2)(a)1. The statute taxes the furnishing of rooms or lodging to transients through time-share sales when the starting day or lodging unit is not fixed at the time of sale. The Court of Appeals affirmed the commission's ruling after applying due-weight deference, concluding that flexible time-share buyers receive no guaranteed unit or week and their stays qualify as transient (less than one month). The court also rejected Telemark's constitutional arguments, holding that the distinction between flexible and guaranteed time-shares for taxation purposes had a rational basis under equal protection and uniformity-of-taxation provisions.

taxesproperty

The case involved Phillip Epping, the City of Neillsville's public works director, who challenged closed sessions held by the city's personnel committee and common council to discuss his job performance and termination. The trial court granted summary judgment to the city, dismissing Epping's declaratory judgment action under the Wisconsin Open Meetings Law. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the closed sessions were authorized under Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(c) for considering employee performance data and that the city complied with any applicable notice requirements under § 19.85(1)(b) because no evidentiary hearing occurred and final action took place in open session. The court reasoned that even if the sessions addressed dismissal, the statute's protections applied only to closed meetings where final action might occur, and any violation would not void the open-session termination vote.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved Linda Henthorn's appeal of her conviction for attempted fraudulent acquisition of a controlled substance under Wisconsin law, after she presented a prescription for Tylenol 3 that had been altered from one refill to eleven refills. The court reversed the conviction, holding that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of attempt. The core reasoning was that Henthorn's actions of altering the prescription and presenting it to the pharmacist did not unequivocally demonstrate the required criminal intent to acquire the drug by misrepresentation, especially since she possessed a valid prescription for the medication and took no further steps toward obtaining additional refills beyond the first. For an attempt conviction, the defendant's conduct must show both intent to commit the underlying offense and that completion of the crime was improbable without external intervention, which was not met here.

criminal law

The case involved Michael Love, who was convicted of burglary after a guilty plea and later had his probation revoked, leading to a ten-year prison sentence. At the post-revocation sentencing hearing, his defense attorney was the same assistant district attorney who had represented the state at his original sentencing two years earlier. Love moved for resentencing, arguing this created an impermissible conflict of interest under ethical rules prohibiting representation in matters with adverse interests. The circuit court denied the motion, finding no conflict based on the attorney's lack of recollection and limited prior involvement. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the appearance of conflict when a former prosecutor represents the defendant in the same case is so strong that it requires remand for resentencing without proof of actual conflict or prejudice, distinguishing it from multiple-representation scenarios where such proof is needed.

criminal lawprocedure

Juneau County filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a ruling that statutory interest arbitration provisions in Wis. Stat. § 111.70(4)(cm)6 no longer applied to it after 1993 and 1995 amendments, because those provisions referenced collective bargaining units consisting solely of school district professional employees and the county had none. The unions responded by seeking a declaration that the provisions applied to all municipal employees. The circuit court ruled that the provisions applied broadly and that continuing the action after a settlement offer was frivolous under § 814.025, awarding fees, but the Court of Appeals reversed the frivolousness finding. It held that the amended pleadings presented a justiciable controversy properly resolved under the declaratory judgment statute § 806.04, so the action was not frivolous to file or maintain.

labor & employment

The case involved Robert King, convicted of second-degree sexual assault of a child under Wis. Stat. § 948.02(2). King appealed on the ground that the prosecutor's peremptory strikes of two older female jurors during voir dire violated his equal protection rights by relying on gender-based assumptions about their likely attitudes. The trial court had accepted the prosecutor's explanations that the strikes were based on age and related experience rather than impermissible factors. The appellate court applied the three-step Batson analysis for gender discrimination, concluded that the strikes were not gender-neutral, reversed the conviction, and remanded for a new trial.

criminal lawcivil rights

The case involved the Wisconsin Department of Regulation and Licensing appealing a circuit court order that affirmed the State Medical Examining Board's dismissal of disciplinary charges against radiologist Dr. George E. Farley. The board had found that Farley failed to detect a bone fragment fracture in one patient's knee x-ray and a contour abnormality suggestive of cancer in another's colon x-ray, but concluded these perceptual errors did not amount to "negligence in treatment" under Wis. Stat. § 448.02(3) because the record lacked evidence that Farley deviated from the accepted standard of care for radiologists. The board relied on expert testimony indicating the abnormalities should have been detectable by the average radiologist yet determined that Farley's misses were isolated mistakes by a competent practitioner rather than negligence, and it considered the absence of any pattern of errors or general incompetence. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that the board correctly applied the legal standard, rejected the notion that any detectable error equals negligence, and properly evaluated both direct evidence and the doctor's overall habits without erring in its factual or legal conclusions.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability

The case involved John Reddin's attempt to challenge the revocation of his probation through a habeas corpus petition after being imprisoned for violating probation terms related to alcohol use. The court decided to affirm the denial of the petition, holding that habeas corpus relief is unavailable when an adequate alternative remedy exists. The core reasoning was that probation revocation decisions are properly reviewed by certiorari, which was barred here by laches due to the petition being filed more than six months after the revocation order.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether Wisconsin's franchise tax on the net income of insurance companies under Wis. Stat. § 71.43(2), which incorporates federal taxable income and thus reaches interest from U.S. government obligations, qualifies as a nondiscriminatory franchise tax permitted by 31 U.S.C. § 3124(a)(1). American Family argued the tax was discriminatory because other statutes exempt income from various state and municipal obligations, and it challenged assessments for tax years 1984-91 after the Department of Revenue included federal obligation income. The Tax Appeals Commission upheld the assessments, concluding that the tax was nondiscriminatory as applied in practice despite facial differences, and the circuit court affirmed. On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that it would review the commission's interpretation of the federal statute de novo with no deference, because the issue involved a federal limitation on state taxing power rather than a Wisconsin statute within the agency's expertise.

taxesfederal powerbusiness & regulatory

The case involved James L. Blackburn, convicted of second-degree sexual assault of a child as a repeater, who appealed on grounds that Wisconsin violated his speedy trial rights under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) by failing to bring him to trial within 180 days of his request while he was imprisoned in Illinois. Blackburn had sent letters demanding dismissal of the warrant or extradition and later signed but attempted to withdraw IAD forms, claiming his initial correspondence sufficed to start the clock. The court affirmed the conviction, ruling that Blackburn did not comply with the IAD's procedural requirements, including proper delivery of written notice and request for final disposition through the custodial official with an accompanying certificate via certified mail. The court reasoned that the IAD's 180-day period is triggered only by strict adherence to these cooperative procedures, which Blackburn's letters and subsequent actions did not satisfy.

criminal lawprocedure