COURT OF APPEALS
DECISION
DATED AND FILED
April 26, 2001
Cornelia G. Clark
Clerk, Court of Appeals
of Wisconsin
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound
volume of the Official Reports.
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of
Appeals. See Wis. Stat. § 808.10
and Rule 809.62.
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS
DISTRICT IV
Susan
Bauer,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
DeForest/Windsor
Municipal Court,
Respondent-Respondent,
Village
of DeForest
Intervenor.
APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Dane County: Diane M. Nicks, Judge. Affirmed.
Before Vergeront, Roggensack and Deininger, JJ.
¶1 PER CURIAM. Susan Bauer, pro se, appeals the circuit court’s order denying her petition for a writ of mandamus. She sought an order compelling the municipal court to waive transcript fees under Wis. Stat. § 814.29 (1999-2000)[1] in relation to her appeal of an adverse municipal court judgment. We affirm.
¶2 The circuit court denied Bauer’s petition for writ of mandamus because it concluded that Bauer’s claims were barred by the doctrine of issue preclusion. “Issue preclusion forecloses relitigation in a subsequent action of an issue of law or fact that has been actually litigated and decided in a prior action.” Jensen v. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co., 204 Wis. 2d 231, 235, 554 N.W.2d 232 (Ct. App. 1996). The circuit court concluded that Bauer had previously brought mandamus actions to compel the municipal court to waive fees and costs in relation to the same municipal action and that the petitions were denied.
¶3 Bauer contends that the transcript fee waiver issue has not been previously litigated. She has not, however, included documents from the prior circuit court cases in the appellate record. The appellant bears the burden of ensuring that the record is sufficient to review the issues raised on appeal. State Bank of Hartland v. Arndt, 129 Wis. 2d 411, 423, 385 N.W.2d 219 (Ct. App. 1986). When an appeal is brought on an incomplete record, we will assume that every fact essential to sustain the circuit court’s decision is supported by the record. Id. Because Bauer has failed to include documents to substantiate her claim that the transcript fee waiver issue was not previously decided, the circuit court’s order must be affirmed.
By the Court.—Order affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5.