Each year, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals releases detailed statistics about its caseload from the last year. The data offer an interesting insight into the work of that court.
Today the Wisconsin Supreme Court heard arguments in Dow Family LLC v. PHH Mortgage Corp., 2013AP221, a case involving the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS), an electronic mortgage tracking system operated by MERSCORP. (The oral argument is available on WisconsinEye here.) The result in the case could affect mortgage lending throughout Wisconsin.
At the end of every episode of the People’s Court, viewers were admonished: “Don’t take the law into your own hands. You take them to court.” But what happens when you do take them to court, and the judge takes the facts into his own hands? This afternoon’s decision from the Seventh Circuit in Mitchell v. JCG Industries, No. 13-2115, provides the answer.
The Supreme Court will inevitably decide to what extent the Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects religiously affiliated employers from providing insurance coverage for contraceptive services, as is generally required under the Affordable Care Act. But in the meantime, the Seventh Circuit has entered the discussion by affirming the denial of the University of Notre Dame’s motion for a preliminary injunction in University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius (No. 13-3853).
A pair of recent decisions explain what a defendant must have done in a forum state to be properly haled into court there.