Wisconsin Supreme Court accepts three new cases

Madison, Wisconsin - June 23, 2020

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has voted to accept three new cases, and the Court acted to deny review in a number of other cases. The case numbers, counties of origin and the issues presented in granted cases are listed below. More detailed synopses will be released at a later date. More information about pending appellate cases can be found on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Access website. Published Court of Appeals opinions can be found here, and the status of pending Supreme Court cases can be found here.

2018AP547 Anderson v. Town of Newbold

Supreme Court case type: Petition for Review
Court of Appeals: District III
Circuit Court: Oneida County, Judge Patrick O'Melia, affirmed
Long caption: State of Wisconsin ex rel. Michael Anderson, Petitioner-Appellant v. Town of Newbold, Respondent-Respondent

Issues presented:

  1. Are The Town of Newbold Land Division Standards set forth in ordinance 13.13 an exercise of a subdivision authority granted under Wis. Stat. 236?
  2. Is the Legislative intent in enacting 2015 WI Act 55 to set statewide shoreland standards, and to not defer to municipalities? 

2018AP2066 State v. Loayza

Supreme Court case type: Petition for Review
Court of Appeals: District IV
Circuit Court: Rock County, Judge Richard T. Werner and Judge John M. Wood, reversed and cause remanded with directions
Long caption: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Alfonso C. Loayza, Defendant-Appellant
Issue presented:

  1. Do the lack of a judgment of conviction for a prior offense and other documents that "support the inference" that the conviction does not exist render a Wisconsin DOT driving record that lists the conviction so unreliable that it does not prove the conviction by even a preponderance of the evidence? 

2018AP1952 State v. Jensen

Supreme Court case type: Petition for Review
Court of Appeals: District II
Circuit Court: Kenosha County, Judge Chad G. Kerkman, reversed and cause remanded with directions
Long caption: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Mark D. Jensen, Defendant-Appellant

Issues presented:

  1. Did the Court of Appeals ignore an established exception to the law-of-the-case doctrine when it concluded that it and the circuit court were bound to follow this Court's 2007 holding that Julie Jensen's statements were testimonial?
  2. Did the circuit court correctly determine that, under the narrower definition of testimonial adopted by the Supreme Court since 2007, Julie's statements are nontestimonial?
  3. Should this Court remand to address the remaining issues that the Court of Appeals did not decide because of its holding that it was bound by this Court's prior decision?

Review denied: The Supreme Court denied review in the following cases. As the state's law-developing court, the Supreme Court exercises its discretion to select for review only those cases that fit certain statutory criteria (see Wis. Stat. § 809.62). Except where indicated, these cases came to the Court via petition for review by the party who lost in the lower court:

18AP1068-CR State v. Hollenquest
20AP51-W Hammersley v. Court of Appeals, District III

18AP588 State v. Downing
18AP1238-CR State v. Swatzak
19AP161 Hinrichs v. Griswold
19AP1058-CR State v. Johnson

18AP1810-CR State v. Vandenberg

18AP966-CR State v. Koch
19AP835-W Gruber v. Pfitzinger

18AP727-CR State v. Gronseth

Eau Claire
18AP1512-CR State v. Grimm
18AP1609/1610-CR State v. Walker

18AP962-CR State v. Fish

18AP924 Horstman v. Dawson

16AP1107-W Jimenez v. Tegels
18AP1390 HSBC Bank USA v. Rinaldi

La Crosse
18AP2321-CR State v. Graham

17AP2114-CRNM State v. Wilson

16AP383 State v. Patterson—Justice Rebecca Frank Dallet did not participate.
18AP19-CR State v. Williams
18AP742 State v. Tate—Justice Rebecca Frank Dallet did not participate.
18AP1345-CR State v. Martin-Andrade—Chief Justice Patience Drake Roggensack did not participate.
18AP1593-1594-CR State v. Bell—Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler dissents.
18AP1848 State v. Hayes
18AP1927 State v. Scott—Justice Rebecca Frank Dallet dissents.
18AP1988 Kohner, Mann & Kailas, S.C. v. Hutchinson—Chief Justice Patience Drake Roggensack and Justice Daniel Kelly did not participate.
18AP2219-CR State v. Brookshire
18AP2324-CR State v. Barrett—Justice Rebecca Frank Dallet and Justice Brian Hagedorn dissent
18AP2329 Parsons v. Associated Bank-Corp
19AP69 Polar v. Hayes
19AP806-CR State v. Greer
19AP1874 State v. D.I.H.
19AP2253-W Evans v. Foster

19AP2074 State v. Dotson

18AP1447-1448-CR State v. Enneper
20AP49-W Hammersley v. Court of Appeals, District III

18AP940 Eagle Cove v. Oneida County

16AP2443-CR State v. Dudas

18AP1621 Massman v. City of Prescott

18AP1467-1468-CR State v. Young

18AP2059-CR State v. Olsen

18AP231-232CR State v. Robbins

19AP1554 S.L.H. v. J.J.D.

18AP1820-CR State v. Jackson

19AP77-CR State v. Hall

Tom Sheehan
Court Information Officer
(608) 261-6640

Back to current headlines