2004 WI 26

Supreme Court of Wisconsin

Case No.:		02-1790
Complete Title:
		Steven H. Hoyme, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Janice S. Brakken, Respondent-Appellant-Petitioner.
		REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS Reported at: 266 Wis. 2d 1060, 668 N.W.2d 562 (Ct. App. 2003-Unpublished)
Opinion Filed:		March 25, 2004
Submitted on Briefs:
Oral Argument:		March 10, 2004
Source of Appeal:
	Court:	Circuit
	County:	Marinette
	Judge:	David G. Miron
Justices:
	Concurred:
	Dissented:
	Not Participating:	SYKES, J., did not participate.
Attorneys:

For the respondent-appellant-petitioner there were briefs by Donald R. Fraker and Fraker Law Firm, S.C., Mequon, and oral argument by Donald R. Fraker.

For the petitioner-respondent there was a brief by Janis M. Burgess and Wesley W. Hoffman & Associates, P.C., Menominee, MI, and oral argument by Janis M. Burgess.

2004 WI 26

notice

This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports.

No. 02-1790

(L.C. No.	00 CV 205)
STATE OF WISCONSIN :		IN SUPREME COURT
Steven H. Hoyme, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Janice S. Brakken, Respondent-Appellant-Petitioner.			FILED MAR 25, 2004 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court

REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. Affirmed.

¶1 PER CURIAM. The court is equally divided on the question of whether the decision of the court of appeals, Hoyme v. Brakken, No. 02-1790, unpublished slip op. (Wis. Ct. App. July 22, 2003), should be affirmed or reversed. Justice JON P. WILCOX, Justice N. PATRICK CROOKS, and Justice DAVID T. PROSSER would affirm; Chief Justice SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, Justice ANN WALSH BRADLEY, and Justice PATIENCE D. ROGGENSACK would reverse. Justice DIANE S. SYKES did not participate.

¶2 Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.