Category Archives: Supreme Court

Subscribe to Supreme Court RSS Feed

Weissman v. Tyson: The Latest Developments in Donning and Doffing in Wisconsin

Earlier this month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted the parties’ voluntary dismissal in Weissman v. Tyson Prepared Foods, 2012AP2196, assuring the precedential status of the court of appeals’ decision. Tyson addressed the compensability under Wisconsin law of time that employees spend pre-shift and post-shift preparing for work by putting on and taking off standard personal protective gear such as gloves, safety … Continue reading this entry

Wisconsin Supreme Court Hears Case Involving Equitable Assignment of Mortgages

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.… Continue reading this entry

Crown Castle USA, Inc. v. Orion Construction Group, LLC: Removing a Tool From the Collection Lawyer's Toolbox

In Crown Castle USA, Inc. v. Orion Construction Group, LLC, No. 09AP3029 (Wis. Sup. Ct., Mar. 22, 2012), the Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision that will be surprising to collections practitioners, concluded that a Wisconsin judgment creditor, in proceedings supplemental to entry of judgment, may not compel anyone but the judgment debtor itself to … Continue reading this entry

260 North 12th Street: Evidence of Environmental Contamination Admissible in Condemnation Valuation Proceedings

The Wisconsin Supreme Court held in 260 North 12th Street, LLC v. Wisconsin Department of Transportation that evidence of contamination is admissible in valuing property for condemnation purposes. 2011 WI 103. Joining what the Chief Justice in her concurrence referred to as a “slim majority” of jurisdictions to have considered the issue, the Court held … Continue reading this entry

"Do you represent Cintas Corporation or Cintas Corporation No. 2?"

That was the first question Chief Justice Abrahamson asked counsel for the defendant during oral argument today in Johnson v. Cintas Corp. (2009 AP 2549). And it was a particularly appropriate one, because the issue before the court was whether the circuit court ever acquired personal jurisdiction over Cintas Corp. No. 2 to enter a default judgment … Continue reading this entry

State v. Nielsen: Order to Show Cause Should Precede Appellate Sanctions

The Wisconsin Supreme Court kicked off November with a unanimous ruling — or, at least, suggestion — that the court of appeals provide a bit more process before sanctioning lawyers who violate the rules governing appellate appendices and certifications. The vehicle for this suggestion is State v. Nielsen, a case in which the court of … Continue reading this entry