WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT

MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORT

 

JULY 2008

 

            This statistical report presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during the month of July 2008 and to date for the term that began on September 1, 2007.

 

 

Opinions Issued by the Court

 

            The Supreme Court issued opinions resolving 35 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 2008        Term to Date

 

Total number of cases resolved by opinion ..............................      35                 108

      Attorney/Judicial disciplinary cases.....................................        8                   34

      Civil cases.........................................................................      19                   49

      Criminal cases ..................................................................        8                   25

           

 

Petitions for Review

 

            A total of 72 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 60 petitions for review, of which 5 petitions were granted.  The Supreme Court currently has 184 petitions for review pending.

 

                                                                                             July 2008        Term to Date

 

Petitions for Review filed..........................................................     72                  755

      Civil cases.........................................................................     38                  436

      Criminal cases...................................................................     34                  319


 

Petition for Review dispositions................................................     60                  750    

      Civil cases (petitions granted).............................................     29  (1)            415  (41)

      Criminal cases (petitions granted).......................................     31  (4)            335  (26)

 

 

Petitions for Bypass

 

            The Supreme Court received 2 petitions for bypass and disposed of 2 petitions for bypass this month.  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 3 petitions for bypass pending.

 

                                                                                             July 2008        Term to Date

 

Petitions for Bypass filed..........................................................       2                    12

      Civil cases.........................................................................       1                      8

      Criminal cases...................................................................       1                      4

 

Petition for Bypass dispositions................................................       2                    11    

      Civil cases (petitions granted).............................................       2  (0)                8  (0)

      Criminal cases (petitions granted).......................................       0  (0)                3  (0)

 

 

Requests for Certification

 

            During July 2008, the Supreme Court received no requests for certification and disposed of 2 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 4 requests for certification pending.

 

                                                                                             July 2008        Term to Date

 

Requests for Certification filed..................................................       0                    13

      Civil cases.........................................................................       0                      7

      Criminal cases...................................................................       0                      6

 

Request for Certification dispositions........................................       2                    20    

      Civil cases (requests granted).............................................       1  (1)              10  (4)

      Criminal cases (requests granted).......................................       1  (0)              10  (6)

 

 

 

           


Regulatory Matters, Supervisory Writs, and Original Actions

 

            During the month, a total of 6 matters within the regulatory jurisdiction of the Court (bar admission, lawyer discipline, and judicial discipline) were filed (including 2 reopened cases).  The Supreme Court also received 4 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.  No original actions were 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 38 regulatory matters and 8 petitions for supervisory writ pending.

 

                                                                                             July 2008        Term to Date

 

Filings

 

Attorney/Judicial disciplinary and bar admission........................        6                   69

Petitions for Supervisory Writ..................................................        4                   50

Other (including Original Actions).............................................        0                     2

 

Dispositions by Order

 

Attorney/Judicial disciplinary and bar admission........................        4                   20

Petitions for Supervisory Writ..................................................      10                   44

Other (including Original Actions).............................................        0                   14

 


DECISIONS BY THE

WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT

 

OPINIONS ISSUED DURING JULY 2008

 

 

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE CASES

 

Docket No.                        Title                                                                                                 Date

 

2007AP002270-D

Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) v. Terrence J. Woods

90 Day Suspension

Per Curiam[1]

 

07/01/2008

2007AP000208-D

OLR v. R. L. McNeely

60 Day Suspension

Per Curiam

Butler, Jr., J. did not participate.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP002629-D

OLR v. Kristin J. Gernetzke

Reinstatement Granted Upon Conditions

Per Curiam

 

07/17/2008

2008AP000181-D

OLR v. Maureen B. Fitzgerald

60 Day Suspension

Per Curiam

 

07/17/2008

2007AP000588-D

OLR v. Joan M. Boyd

5 Month Suspension

Per Curiam

 

07/18/2008

2006AP002430-D

OLR v. Carlos A. Gamiño

18 Month Suspension

Per Curiam

 

07/30/2008

2008AP000553-D

OLR v. Michael F. Swensen

License Revoked

Per Curiam

 

07/31/2008

2008AP000570-D

OLR v. Eric L. Crandall

30 Day Suspension

Per Curiam

 

07/31/2008

 

 

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES

 

Docket No.                        Title                                                                                                 Date

 

2005AP002855

Shannon Below v. Dion R. Norton

Court of Appeals Affirmed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Crooks, J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/01/2008

2006AP000405

Gregory A. Liebovich v. Minnesota Insurance Company

Court of Appeals Affirmed and, as modified, Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Ziegler, J. did not participate.

 

07/01/2008

2006AP000450

Town of Rhine v. Brock O. Bizzell

Court of Appeals Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Ziegler, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

 

07/01/2008

2006AP003092

Michael J. Watton v. Nannette H. Hegerty

Court of Appeals Reversed

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley, J.

 

07/01/2008

2006AP001566

Estate of Dale Otto v. Physicians Insurance Company of Wisconsin, Inc.

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Dissent:  Roggensack, J., joined by Prosser, J. and Ziegler, J.

 

07/03/2008

2006AP001859

Walgreen Co. v. City of Madison

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

 

07/08/2008


 

2005AP002935

Taneceia Larry v. Derrick L. Harris

Court of Appeals Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Concurrence/Dissent:  Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP000974-CR

State v. Ramon Lopez Arias

Circuit Court Reversed and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J., and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP002060-CR

State v. Dwight M. Sanders

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Concurrence:  Prosser, J., joined by Roggensack, J. and Ziegler, J.

Concurrence:  Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP002554

Town of Madison v. County of Dane

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Dissent:  Roggensack, J., joined by Prosser, J. and Ziegler, J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP002744-CR

State v. Alexander Caleb Grunke

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J. and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP002745-CR

State v. Nicholas Owen Grunke

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J. and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2006AP002746-CR

State v. Dustin Blake Radke

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J. and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/09/2008

2005AP001287

Robert Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc.

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Concurrence:  Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J.

Concurrence:  Roggensack, J., joined by Ziegler, J.

 

07/10/2008

2006AP000939

Estate of James B. Sustache v. American Family Mutual Ins. Co.

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Concurrence:  Bradley, J.

 

07/10/2008

2004AP003239

Wisconsin Department of Revenue v. Menasha Corporation

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Ziegler, J.

Concurrence:  Crooks, J., joined by Prosser, J. and Roggensack, J.

Dissent:  Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley, J. and Butler, Jr., J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J., joined by Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/11/2008

2005AP001026

Barbara Sands v. The Whitnall School District

Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Dissent:  Prosser, J.

 

07/11/2008

2006AP000662

State v. Beaver Dam Area Development Corporation

Circuit Court Reversed and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Bradley, J.

Dissent:  Prosser, J., joined by Roggensack, J.

Ziegler, J. did not participate.

 

07/11/2008

2005AP001527

Berner Cheese Corp. v. Lyle A. Krug

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Roggensack, J.

Concurrence:  Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/15/2008


 

2006AP000102-CR

State v. Nathaniel L. Sumner

Court of Appeals Reversed

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP001094

Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser

Court of Appeals Affirmed and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Dissent:  Ziegler, J.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP001956

Jeannie Hefty v. Daniel R. Strickhouser

Court of Appeals Affirmed and Cause Remanded

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Dissent:  Ziegler, J.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP002254-CR

State v. Carmen L. Doss

Court of Appeals Reversed

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP002753-CR

State v. Jonathan J. Hubbard

Court of Appeals Reversed

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Concurrence:  Abrahamson, C.J., joined by Bradley, J. and Butler, Jr., J.

Concurrence:  Butler, Jr., J.

 

07/15/2008

2006AP000291

Kenneth W. Hornback v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Butler, Jr., J.

Prosser, J. did not participate.

 

07/16/2008

2006AP000818

J. G. v. Deborah S. Wangard

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Dissent:  Bradley, J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Butler, Jr., J.

Dissent:  Butler, Jr., J., joined by Abrahamson, C.J. and Bradley, J.

 

07/16/2008

2006AP001521

Hans Rechsteiner v. Hazelden

Court of Appeals Affirmed

Majority Opinion:  Prosser, J.

Butler, Jr., J. did not participate.

07/16/2008

 



[1] “Per Curiam” means “by the Court.”  Opinions issued per curiam are handed down by the Court as a whole.