Supreme Court accepts 15 new cases

Madison, Wisconsin - Dec. 3, 2003

The Wisconsin Supreme Court this fall voted to grant review in 15 new cases. The case numbers, brief summary of the issues (provided by the Office of the Clerk of Supreme Court), and counties of origin are listed below. To read the full record, go to the Supreme Court Clerk's Office, Suite 215, Tenney Building, 110 E. Main St., Madison. Where possible, Court of Appeals opinions, certification memos, and laws cited in these cases are hyperlinked.

00-3318 In re the Commitment of J. Lombard: State v. J. Lombard
Issue: Was the petitioner denied the effective assistance of counsel when, at a Chapter 980 (sexually violent person) commitment trial, his lawyer failed to object to the admission of his pre-petition evaluation on the basis that the evaluating psychologist had not given a Miranda warning prior to the interview? From Dane County.

01-1402 State v. W. Thornton
Issues: Is the petitioner's Peete/Howard "nexus" claim barred under Wis. Stat. § 974.06(4) and State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994)?
Did the circuit court's failure to instruct on the "nexus" between possession of the gun and the substantive offenses of conviction mandate that the sentence enhancer on those offenses be vacated? From Milwaukee County.

01-3051 T. Van Lare, et al v. Vogt, Inc.
Issues: Does the economic loss doctrine bar a claim for strict responsibility misrepresentation in a real estate transaction where the alleged misrepresentations are contained in a contract between the parties and the claimed damages are solely for loss of money? From Waukesha County.

02-1203-CR State v. D. McDowell
Issue:  May a criminal defense attorney require his or her client to testify in an unaided narrative format rather than in the usual question and answer format in order to avoid complicity in what is believed will be perjured testimony? If so, under what circumstances? From Milwaukee County.

02-1790 S. Hoyme v. J. Brakken
Issues: May a party challenge the constitutionality of a circuit court ruling by filing a motion for relief under Wis. Stat. § 806.07(1)(h)? What standard of review shall an appellate court employ in determining whether an appeal is frivolous pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 809.25(3)(c)2? From Marinette County.

02-1915 T. Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc.
Issue: Did the circuit court wrongly exercise its discretion in the amount of attorney's fees and costs awarded to plaintiff pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 218.01(9)b? From Milwaukee County.

02-2035 Beloit Liquidating Trust v. J. Grade, et al
Justice David Prosser Jr. is not participating in this case.
Issues: Was this action, otherwise barred by the two-year statute of limitations for intentional torts under Wis. Stat. § 893.57, timely because of a two-year extension provided for by 11 U.S.C. § 108(a) pertaining to certain bankruptcy matters?
Do the officers and directors of a Wisconsin-based corporation owe a fiduciary duty to the corporation's creditors when the corporation is a going concern?
Can the Court of Appeals apply issue preclusion when the question of issue preclusion has never been addressed by the circuit court? From Milwaukee County.

02-2322-FT State, et al v. City of Rhinelander, et al
Issues: Is the City of Rhinelander entitled to seek review of a 2001 Court of Appeals' decision in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Johnson Controls v. Employers Insurance, 2003 WI 108, which overruled a 1994 decision, City of Edgerton v. General Casualty Co. of Wisconsin , 184 Wis. 2d 750, 517 N.W.2d 463 (1994), cert denied 514 U.S. 1017 (1995)? Did an umbrella insurance policy exclude coverage for landfill-related groundwater pollution of a third-party property? From Oneida County.

02-2793-CR State v. V. Johnson
Issues: Did the circuit court err in allowing the prosecutor to cross-examine the petitioner about the credibility and honesty of the State's witnesses?
Was the petitioner denied effective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to object to the alleged improper cross-examination? From Milwaukee County.

02-3014-CR State v. B. Gruetzmacher
Issues: Should Wisconsin criminal courts be allowed to correct obvious errors in multi-count sentences where it is clear that a good-faith mistake was made in an initial sentence and the court promptly recognizes the error, and seeks to impose a lawfully structured sentence that achieves the overall result the court originally intended? From Waupaca County.

02-3293 GPS v. Town of St. Germain
Issues: May a zoning appeals board's decision-making process, including proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding a zoning variance request, as drafted by the board's attorney before the board's decision or vote, be excluded from public access based upon an attorney-client privilege? From Vilas County.

02-3353-FT State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. N. Langridge
Issue: Do Gocha v. Shimon, 215 Wis. 2d 586, 573 N.W.2d 218 (Ct. App. 1997), and Richie v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co ., 140 Wis. 2d 51, 409 N.W.2d 146 (Ct. App. 1987), preclude an insured person from receiving benefits under an underinsured motorist insurance policy unless the insured individual personally suffered bodily injury? From Racine County.

02-3380 State ex rel. M. Thorson v. D. Schwarz
Issue: Is the petitioner entitled to sentence credit for the time he was incarcerated between the expiration of his mandatory release date from a criminal conviction and the resolution of Chapter 980 (sexually violent person) proceedings that were ultimately dismissed? From Eau Claire County.

03-0534 thru 03-0553 Village of Trempealeau v. M. Mikrit
Justice Jon P. Wilcox is not participating in this case.
Issue: Did the circuit court have authority to proceed in this action when the village failed to follow the requirements set forth under Wis. Stat. § 66.0113 in ticketing a local salvage yard owner for various ordinance violations? If the circuit court did not have this authority, can this issue be raised after the trial and appeal? From Trempealeau County.

03-0662 C. Bosco v. LIRC, et al
Issues: Did the petitioner's insurance carrier engage in "bad faith" pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 102.18(1)(bp) by failing to either pay benefits that were awarded by the Labor and Industry Review Commission or immediately challenge that award in the courts?
Is an insured employer separately liable for "bad faith" penalties for failing to issue benefits during a court appeal by its insurer on the issue of occupational disease date of injury? From Kenosha County.

For more information contact:
Amanda Todd
Court Information Officer
(608) 264-6256

Back to top

Back to headlines archive 2003