MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORT
JULY 2009
This statistical report presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during the month of July 2009 and to date for the term that began on September 1, 2008.
Opinions Issued
by the Court
The Supreme Court issued opinions resolving 29 cases in July. Information about these opinions, including the Court’s dispositions and the names of the authoring justices, can be found on the attached table.
July 2009 Term to Date
Total number of cases resolved by opinion .............................. 29 87
Attorney disciplinary cases................................................. 6 23
Judicial disciplinary cases................................................... 0 0
Civil cases......................................................................... 21 43
Criminal cases .................................................................. 2 21
Petitions for Review
A total of 69 petitions for review were filed during the month. A petition for review asks the Supreme Court to review the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is discretionary, meaning that review is granted in selected cases only. In July, the Supreme Court disposed of 62 petitions for review, of which 2 petitions were granted. The Supreme Court currently has 225 petitions for review pending.
July 2009 Term to Date
Petitions for Review filed.......................................................... 69 718
Civil cases......................................................................... 35 363
Criminal cases................................................................... 34 355
Petition for Review dispositions................................................ 62 690
Civil cases (petitions granted)............................................. 25 (0) 346 (28)
Criminal cases (petitions granted)....................................... 37 (2) 344 (16)
Petitions for
Bypass
In July, the Supreme Court received 2 petitions for bypass and disposed of 2 petitions for bypass, of which 1 was granted. In a petition for bypass, a party requests that the Supreme Court take jurisdiction of an appeal or other proceeding pending in the Court of Appeals. A matter appropriate for bypass is usually one which meets one or more of the criteria for review by the Supreme Court and one the Supreme Court concludes it will ultimately choose to consider regardless of how the Court of Appeals might decide the issues. A petition for bypass may also be granted where there is a clear need to hasten the ultimate appellate decision. The Supreme Court currently has 2 petitions for bypass pending.
July 2009 Term to Date
Petitions for Bypass filed.......................................................... 2 7
Civil cases......................................................................... 1 5
Criminal cases................................................................... 1 2
Petition for Bypass dispositions................................................ 2 11
Civil cases (petitions granted)............................................. 1 (0) 8 (0)
Criminal cases (petitions granted)....................................... 1 (1) 3 (1)
Requests for
Certification
During July 2009, the Supreme Court received 2 requests for certification and disposed of no requests for certification. In a request for certification, the Court of Appeals asks the Supreme Court to exercise its appellate jurisdiction before the Court of Appeals hears the matter. A request for certification is decided on the basis of the same criteria as a petition to bypass. The Supreme Court currently has 2 requests for certification pending.
July 2009 Term to Date
Requests for Certification filed.................................................. 2 10
Civil cases......................................................................... 0 7
Criminal cases................................................................... 2 3
Request for Certification dispositions........................................ 0 10
Civil cases (requests granted)............................................. 0 (0) 8 (6)
Criminal cases (requests granted)....................................... 0 (0) 2 (2)
Regulatory
Matters, Supervisory Writs, and Original Actions
During the month, a total of 4 matters within the regulatory jurisdiction of the Court (bar admission, lawyer discipline, and judicial discipline) were filed. The Supreme Court also received 8 petitions for supervisory writ, which ask the Supreme Court to order the Court of Appeals or a circuit court to take a certain action in a case. One original action was filed. An original action is a petition asking the Supreme Court to take jurisdiction over a particular matter. When an opinion is issued in these cases, the disposition is included in “Opinions Issued by the Court” above; otherwise, the case is disposed of by order and is included in the totals below. The Supreme Court currently has 34 regulatory matters and 17 petitions for supervisory writ pending.
July 2009 Term to Date
Filings
Attorney discipline................................................................... 4 46
Judicial discipline..................................................................... 0 1
Bar admission.......................................................................... 0 1
Petitions for Supervisory Writ.................................................. 8 62
Other (including Original Actions)............................................. 2 10
Dispositions
by Order
Attorney discipline................................................................... 0 19
Judicial discipline..................................................................... 0 0
Bar admission.......................................................................... 0 0
Petitions for Supervisory Writ.................................................. 3 52
Other (including Original Actions)............................................. 1 12
DECISIONS BY THE
OPINIONS ISSUED DURING JULY 2009
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE CASES
Docket No. Title Date
|
2007AP000869-D |
Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) v. Thomas J. Molinaro 60 Day Suspension Per Curiam[1] Bradley, J. did not participate. |
07/01/2009 |
|
2008AP003016-D |
OLR v. James T. Winch Three Year Suspension Per Curiam |
07/03/2009 |
|
2007AP002135-D |
OLR v. Neil R. McKloskey 60 Day Suspension Per Curiam |
07/07/2009 |
|
2006AP001191-D and 2007AP001908-D |
OLR v. Willie J. Nunnery Three Year Suspension Per Curiam |
07/21/2009 |
|
2007AP2935-D |
90 Day Suspension Per Curiam |
07/23/2009 |
CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES
Docket No. Title Date
|
2007AP000308 |
Tywanda F. Luckett v. Aaron C. Bodner, M.D. Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Abrahamson, C.J. Concurrence: Ziegler, J., joined by Roggensack and Gableman, J.J. Dissent: Prosser, J. Bradley, J. did not participate. |
07/07/2009 |
|
2007AP000541 |
Estate of Robert V. Genrich v. OHIC Insurance Company Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Roggensack, J. Concurrence/Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Crooks, J. Dissent/Concurrence: Crooks, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Bradley, J. |
07/07/2009 |
|
2006AP002910 |
Kenneth J. Behrendt v. Gulf Underwriters Insurance Co. Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Crooks, J. Concurrence: Abrahamson, C.J. Concurrence: Roggensack, J., joined by Ziegler and Gableman, J.J. |
07/09/2009 |
|
2007AP001754 |
Glen D. Hocking v. City of Circuit court order affirmed. Majority Opinion: Ziegler, J. Concurrence: Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley, J. Crooks, J. did not participate. |
07/09/2009 |
|
2007AP001799 |
Douglas Osborn v. Harold Dennison Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. |
07/09/2009 |
|
2007AP002382-CR |
State v. Jason L. McClaren Court of Appeals decision reversed and remanded. Majority Opinion: Crooks, J. Dissent: Bradley, J. Abrahamson, C.J. did not participate. |
07/09/2009 |
|
2006AP002599 |
Gregory G. Phelps v. Physicians Insurance Company of Wisconsin, Inc. Court of Appeals decision reversed and cause remanded to the circuit court. Majority Opinion: Roggensack, J. Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/10/2009 |
|
2007AP001992 |
The Farmers Automobile Insurance Association v. Union Pacific Railway Company Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Gableman, J. Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/10/2009 |
|
2006AP002670 |
Ruben Baez Godoy v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Bradley, J. Concurrence: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. Concurrence: Crooks, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Bradley, J. Concurrence: Prosser, J., joined by Ziegler and Gableman, J.J. Roggensack, J. did not participate. |
07/14/2009 |
|
2006AP002933 |
Kara Horst v. Deere & Company Court of Appeals decision affirmed. Majority Opinion: Gableman, J. Concurrence: Crooks, J. Concurrence: Gableman, J., joined by Prosser and Roggensack, J.J. Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. Ziegler, J. did not participate. |
07/14/2009 |
|
2007AP000617 |
Star Direct, Inc. v. Eugene Dal Pra Court of Appeals decision affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Majority Opinion: Gableman, J. Concurrence/Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. Dissent: Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/14/2009 |
|
2007AP001638 |
Christine L. Tensfeldt v. F. William Haberman Circuit Court order affirmed in part, reversed in part, and cause remanded. Majority Opinion: Bradley, J. Concurrence/Dissent: Roggensack, J., joined by Ziegler, J. Gableman, J. did not participate. |
07/14/2009 |
|
2006AP003003 |
American Family Mutual Ins. Co. v. David Golke Circuit Court order and judgment reversed and cause remanded. Majority Opinion: Gableman, J. Concurrence: Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley, J. |
07/15/2009 |
|
2007AP001160 |
Circuit Court judgment affirmed and cause remanded to the circuit court. Majority Opinion: Roggensack, J. Concurrence: Bradley, J. Dissent: Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/15/2009 |
|
2007AP002584 |
Robert Zellner v. Daryl Herrick Appeal dismissed; Circuit Court order affirmed. Majority Opinion: Crooks, J. Dissent: Roggensack, J. |
07/15/2009 |
|
2006AP002866 |
City of Court of Appeals decision reversed. Majority Opinion: Abrahamson, C.J. Concurrence: Ziegler, J., joined by Gableman, J. Dissent: Prosser, J., joined by Crooks and Roggensack, J.J. |
07/17/2009 |
|
2006AP000385 |
Harold Umansky v. ABC Insurance Co. Court of Appeals decision affirmed and remanded. Majority Opinion: Crooks, J. Concurrence: Crooks, J., joined by Prosser, J. Concurrence: Prosser, J., joined by Crooks, J. Dissent: Ziegler, J., joined by Roggensack and Gableman, J.J. |
07/17/2009 |
|
2007AP001396 |
Kelly J. Harvot v. Solo Cup Company Circuit Court decision and order affirmed. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/17/2009 |
|
2008AP001913-CQ |
Bruce A. Tammi v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc. Certified questions from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit answered, in part, and cause remanded. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. |
07/17/2009 |
|
2006AP000803 |
Milton J. Christensen v. Michael J. Sullivan Court of Appeals decision reversed. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. Dissent: Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley and Crooks, J.J. |
07/21/2009 |
|
2007AP000496 |
Coulee Catholic Schools v. LIRC Court of Appeals decision reversed and remanded. Majority Opinion: Gableman, J. Dissent: Crooks, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Bradley, J. |
07/21/2009 |
|
2007AP001042-CR |
State v. Tony Payano Court of Appeals decision reversed. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. Dissent: Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. |
07/21/2009 |
|
2007AP000619 |
Richard Bubb v. William Brusky, M.D. Court of Appeals decision reversed and the cause remanded to the Circuit Court. Majority Opinion: Prosser, J. Ziegler, J. did not participate. |
07/24/2009 |
[1] “Per Curiam” means “by the Court.” Opinions issued per curiam are handed down by the Court as a whole.