Skip to main content

An affiliate of Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce

The Cases Still Before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Part I

While the Wisconsin Supreme Court might be done for the term, the justices still have a dozen cases on the docket. Here is a summary of the cases left for next term:*

  • Clean Wisconsin, Inc v. DNR (Clean Wisconsin), 2018AP0059.
    Accepted by the court at the beginning of 2019, Clean Wisconsin enters its third term before the Supreme Court. The case will determine DNR’s explicit authority to regulate high capacity wells and whether the legislature delegated its public trust authority. After the Department of Justice petitions to switch sides in the litigation, and the Wisconsin Legislature moved to intervene, the court put the case on hold where it remains awaiting a briefing schedule. GLLF represents eight Wisconsin business associations as intervenors in this case.
  • Clean Wisconsin, Inc v. DNR (Kinard Farms), 2016AP001688.
    A sister case to Clean Wisconsin, Kinnard Farms also addresses the scope of DNR’s explicit authority, specifically whether DNR can impose additional requirements on CAFO permit conditions. The case was also put on hold after the Wisconsin Legislature moved to intervene and awaits a briefing schedule. GLLF represented six business associations as amici in this case at the court of appeals.
  • Mohns Inc. v. BMO Harris Bank National Association, 2018AP000071.
    Currently briefed and awaiting assignment for oral arguments, this case involves a question of civil procedure and the amount of damages that can be awarded when the court grants a default judgment to a party as a sanction on the other party violating the rules of discovery.
  • Gail Moreschi v. Village of Williams Bay and Town of Linn ETZ Zoning Board of Appeals, 2018AP000283.
    With oral arguments scheduled for September 8th, this case asks whether a board can create new minutes and new decision after receipt of a writ of certiorari action. It also will determine the meaning of a “triggering event” for purposes of appeal on a writ of certiorari under Wisconsin law.
  • State v. Leevan Roundtree, 2018AP000594.
    With oral arguments scheduled for September 11th, this case will address whether Wis. Stat. § 941.29(2) is unconstitutional as applied to a person convicted of failure to pay child support and whether a recent United States Supreme Court decision means a guilty plea waives a claim that the statute of conviction is unconstitutional as applied.
  • Ronald L. Collison v. City of Milwaukee Bd. of Review, 2018AP000669.
    With the first brief not due till October, this case addresses whether the policy used by the City of Milwaukee in valuing contaminated property conforms to the proper statute and whether the assessor for the City of Milwaukee considered the correct factors when assessing the property at issue.
  • State v. Kevin L. Nash, 2018AP000731.
    With oral arguments scheduled for September 11th, this case will determine whether a trial court can sufficiently find the prerequisite “strong proof of guilt” for a guilty plea in a criminal complaint, or if additional information is necessary.
  • State v. Brian L. Halverson,  2018AP000858.
    With oral arguments on September 14th, this case will examine whether incarceration automatically produces a Miranda custody under the Wisconsin Constitution.
  • Ted Ritter v. Tony Farrow, 2018AP001518.
    With oral arguments on September 8th, this case will address whether Wisconsin trademark law permits an implied assignment of trademarks to a new owner when no other business assets or services are transferred and whether it applies applies under Wisconsin’s Condominium Ownership Act.
  • State v. Jamie Lane Stephenson, 2018AP002104.
    With oral arguments on September 14th, this case will determine the standard for proving someone is “dangerous” and whether the state must present expert opinion testimony when committing someone under Chapter 980.
  • State v. Anthony James Jendusa, 2018AP002357.
    With a briefing schedule currently extended through August, this case address multiple questions about procedure in a sexually-violent person commitment trial.
  • Mark Jefferson v. Dane County, 2020AP000557.
    Last but not least, in this original action currently waiting a decision, the court will address several challenges to the use of absentee ballots amidst COVID-19.

*Per the list of cases on the docket released May 5th. The court will decide other cases next term, but these are the ones accepted for this past term that did not get wrapped up.