District IV
May 21, 2014
To:
Hon. Richard O. Wright
Circuit Court Judge
Marquette County Courthouse
P.O. Box 187
Montello, WI 53949
Diane Mortensen
Register in Probate
Juneau County Justice Center
200 Oak St., Room 2300
Mauston, WI 53948
Peter J. Curran
Fred D. Hollenbeck III
Curran, Hollenbeck & Orton, S.C.
P. O. Box 140
Mauston, WI 53948
Anne Beard
S6565 U.S. Highway 12
Baraboo, WI 53913
Gregory Wenkman
2300 Kingfish Road
Naples, FL 34102
You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013AP812 |
In the estate of William G. Wenkman: Anne Beard v. Estate of William G. Wenkman (L.C. # 2010PR98) |
|
|
|
|
Before Blanchard, P.J., Sherman and Kloppenburg, JJ.
Anne Beard and Gregory Wenkman appeal a judgment imposing statutory costs of $1729.79 against them in a probate proceeding. They argue that the prevailing parties, the Estate and personal representative, forfeited their right to costs because they failed to perfect the judgment within thirty days of entry as required by Wis. Stat. § 806.06(4) (2011-12).[1] Upon our review of the parties’ briefs and the record, we conclude at conference that the judgment should be summarily affirmed because the issue was not properly preserved for appeal.
An issue that was not presented to the circuit court will not be considered for the first time on appeal. Shadley v. Lloyds of London, 2009 WI App 165, ¶25, 322 Wis. 2d 189, 776 N.W.2d 838. The record on appeal does not show that the circuit court was asked to deny costs based on the prevailing parties’ failure to timely request costs. If the appellants rely on an oral objection, they must produce a transcript to establish that the issue was properly preserved and to show the circuit court’s rationale for imposing costs. It is the appellants’ obligation to ensure that the transcripts are made a part of the record. See Fiumefreddo v. McLean, 174 Wis. 2d 10, 26-27, 496 N.W.2d 226 (Ct. App. 1993). The appellants did not order any transcripts for this appeal. In addition, their failure to properly preserve the issue was raised in the respondents’ brief and the appellants did not file a reply brief, in effect conceding the point. See Charolais Breeding Ranches, Ltd. v. FPC Secs. Corp., 90 Wis. 2d 97, 109, 279 N.W.2d 493 (Ct. App. 1979).
IT IS ORDERED that the judgment is summarily affirmed pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Court of Appeals