25 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2003 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Interest of CWgreen2 sentences1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. 1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. [19] In State v. Way, 113 Wis. 2d 82, 91 , 334 N.W.2d 918 (Ct. App. 1983), the court of appeals refused to reverse a *974 sentence on the ground that there was a factual error in the presentence report, stating that it found that there were "sufficient other facts presented in the record which would justify the trial court sentencing" as it did. | 2 | 2 |
Green Spring Farms v. Kerstengreen2 sentences1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act 1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act | 2 | 2 |
In RE MARRIAGE OF GERRITS v. Gerritsgreen2 sentences2003See Gerrits v. Gerrits, 167 Wis. 2d 429, 446 , 482 N.W.2d 134 (Ct. App. 1992). ¶ 36. 2003See Gerrits v. Gerrits, 167 Wis. 2d 429, 446 , 482 N.W.2d 134 (Ct. App. 1992). ¶ 36. | 1 | 1 |
Davis v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2002See, e.g., Davis v. United States, 192 F.3d 951, 957 (10th Cir. 1999) ("This court reviews ['necessary and/or indispensable' party] determinations under an abuse of discretion standard."); Makah Indian Tribe, 910 F.2d at 560 ("We conclude that the district court's determination that the absent tribes are indispensible to the Makah's claim for reallocation was not an abuse of discretion."). 2002We also observe that even though it espouses an abuse of discretion standard of review, the Tenth Circuit includes the caveat that "[underlying legal conclusions supporting Rule 19 determinations, however, are reviewed de novo." Davis, 192 F.3d at 957 . | 1 | 1 |
Makah Indian Tribe v. C. William Veritygreen1 sentence2002See, e.g., Davis v. United States, 192 F.3d 951, 957 (10th Cir. 1999) ("This court reviews ['necessary and/or indispensable' party] determinations under an abuse of discretion standard."); Makah Indian Tribe, 910 F.2d at 560 ("We conclude that the district court's determination that the absent tribes are indispensible to the Makah's claim for reallocation was not an abuse of discretion."). | 1 | 1 |
Holman v. Family Health Plangreen1 sentence1999See Holman v. Family Health Plan, 227 Wis. 2d at 482 . 5 This court, in City of Brookfield v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 171 Wis. 2d 400, 423 , 491 N.W.2d 484 (1992), changed the abuse of discretion standard to an erroneous exercise of discretion standard. | 1 | 1 |
City of Brookfield v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Districtgreen2 sentences1999See Holman v. Family Health Plan, 227 Wis. 2d at 482 . 5 This court, in City of Brookfield v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 171 Wis. 2d 400, 423 , 491 N.W.2d 484 (1992), changed the abuse of discretion standard to an erroneous exercise of discretion standard. 1999See Holman v. Family Health Plan, 227 Wis. 2d at 482 . 5 This court, in City of Brookfield v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 171 Wis. 2d 400, 423 , 491 N.W.2d 484 (1992), changed the abuse of discretion standard to an erroneous exercise of discretion standard. | 1 | 1 |
Mulder v. Mittelstadtgreen2 sentences1996"The basis of all equitable rules is the principle of discretionary application." Id. at 115 , 352 N.W.2d at 228 (citations omitted). [2] Looking to federal law, the appellate standard of review in determining standing in shareholder derivative litigation is an abuse of discretion test, the counterpart to Wisconsin's "erroneous exercise of discretion" standard. 1996"The basis of all equitable rules is the principle of discretionary application." Id. at 115 , 352 N.W.2d at 228 (citations omitted). [2] Looking to federal law, the appellate standard of review in determining standing in shareholder derivative litigation is an abuse of discretion test, the counterpart to Wisconsin's "erroneous exercise of discretion" standard. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sibleygreen2 sentences1992This court will not question the trial court's ruling unless the abuse of discretion resulted in a procedure that was " 'so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification' as to amount to a denial of due process of law." Id. at 230 , 444 N.W.2d at 392 (citations omitted). 1992This court will not question the trial court's ruling unless the abuse of discretion resulted in a procedure that was " 'so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification' as to amount to a denial of due process of law." Id. at 230 , 444 N.W.2d at 392 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
In RE MARRIAGE OF ROELLIG v. Roelliggreen2 sentences1992See Roellig v. Roellig, 146 Wis. 2d 652, 655 , 431 N.W.2d 759, 760-61 (Ct. App. 1988). 1992See Roellig v. Roellig, 146 Wis. 2d 652, 655 , 431 N.W.2d 759, 760-61 (Ct. App. 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Town of Medary v. City of La Crossegreen2 sentences1992See Town of Medary v. City of La Crosse, 88 Wis. 2d 101, 124 , 277 N.W.2d 310, 321 (Ct. App. 1979). 1992See Town of Medary v. City of La Crosse, 88 Wis. 2d 101, 124 , 277 N.W.2d 310, 321 (Ct. App. 1979). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pharrgreen2 sentences1992State v. Pharr, 115 Wis. 2d 334, 342 , 340 N.W.2d 498, 501 (1983). 1992State v. Pharr, 115 Wis. 2d 334, 342 , 340 N.W.2d 498, 501 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. City of La Crossegreen2 sentences1991State v. City of La Crosse, 120 Wis. 2d 263, 268 , 354 N.W.2d 738, 740 (Ct. App. 1984). 1991State v. City of La Crosse, 120 Wis. 2d 263, 268 , 354 N.W.2d 738, 740 (Ct. App. 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Robertson-Ryan & Associates, Inc. v. Pohlhammergreen2 sentences1991Robertson-Ryan & Assocs. v. Pohlhammer, 112 Wis. 2d 583, 587 , 334 N.W.2d 246, 249 (1983). 1991Robertson-Ryan & Assocs. v. Pohlhammer, 112 Wis. 2d 583, 587 , 334 N.W.2d 246, 249 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Outlawgreen2 sentences1990See State v. Outlaw, 108 Wis. 2d 112, 114-15 , 321 N.W.2d 145,148 (1982). 1990See State v. Outlaw, 108 Wis. 2d 112, 114-15 , 321 N.W.2d 145,148 (1982). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Oberlandergreen2 sentences1989See id. at 140 , 438 N.W.2d at 583 .) We review this case under the abuse of discretion standard, as the supreme court did in Oberlander. 1989See id. at 140 , 438 N.W.2d at 583 .) We review this case under the abuse of discretion standard, as the supreme court did in Oberlander. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Paternity of BWSgreen2 sentences1989W.S., 131 Wis. 2d at 315, 388 N.W.2d at 622. 1989W.S., 131 Wis. 2d at 315, 388 N.W.2d at 622. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fishnickgreen2 sentences1988State v. Fishnick, 127 Wis. 2d 247, 257 , 378 N.W.2d 272, 278 (1985). 1988State v. Fishnick, 127 Wis. 2d 247, 257 , 378 N.W.2d 272, 278 (1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Scarpaci v. Milwaukee Countygreen | 1 | 1 |
Coffey v. City of Milwaukeegreen1 sentence1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act | 1 | 1 |
Arnold v. Shawano County Agricultural Societygreen2 sentences1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act 1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act | 1 | 1 |
Maynard v. City of Madisongreen2 sentences1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act 1987Society, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 209 , 330 N.W.2d 773, 776 (1983), was expressly overruled in Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 317 , 401 N.W.2d 816, 821 (1987): "We now wish to clarify any existing ambiguity by unequivocally stating that ... [t]o the extent that the Arnold language may be construed so as to retain or advance the abuse of discretion standard ... that language is hereby withdrawn." We withdraw the similar statements in Hiltpold and Jones . 4 In Maynard v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 2d 273, 282 , 304 N.W.2d 163, 168 (Ct. App. 1981), the court stated that quasi-judicial act | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. MacEmon
green
2 sentences1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. 1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. [19] In State v. Way, 113 Wis. 2d 82, 91 , 334 N.W.2d 918 (Ct. App. 1983), the court of appeals refused to reverse a *974 sentence on the ground that there was a factual error in the presentence report, stating that it found that there were "sufficient other facts presented in the record which would justify the trial court sentencing" as it did. | 2 | 1991–1991 |
In Interest of CDM
green
2 sentences1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. 1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. | 2 | 1991–1991 |
Burkes v. Hales
green
2 sentences1992Id. at 590 , 478 N.W.2d at 39 . 1992Id. at 590 , 478 N.W.2d at 39 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Miller
green
2 sentences1992State v. Miller, 160 Wis. 2d 646, 654 , 467 N.W.2d 118 (1991). 1992State v. Miller, 160 Wis. 2d 646, 654 , 467 N.W.2d 118 (1991). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Duhame v. Duhame
green
2 sentences1992Duhame, 154 Wis. 2d at 263 , 453 N.W.2d at 151 ; Parge, 159 Wis. 2d at 178-79 , 464 N.W.2d at 218-19 . 1992Duhame, 154 Wis. 2d at 263 , 453 N.W.2d at 151 ; Parge, 159 Wis. 2d at 178-79 , 464 N.W.2d at 218-19 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Parge v. Parge
green
2 sentences1992Duhame, 154 Wis. 2d at 263 , 453 N.W.2d at 151 ; Parge, 159 Wis. 2d at 178-79 , 464 N.W.2d at 218-19 . 1992Duhame, 154 Wis. 2d at 263 , 453 N.W.2d at 151 ; Parge, 159 Wis. 2d at 178-79 , 464 N.W.2d at 218-19 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Way
green
2 sentences1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. [19] In State v. Way, 113 Wis. 2d 82, 91 , 334 N.W.2d 918 (Ct. App. 1983), the court of appeals refused to reverse a *974 sentence on the ground that there was a factual error in the presentence report, stating that it found that there were "sufficient other facts presented in the record which would justify the trial court sentencing" as it did. 1991Id., at 667 ; In Interest of C.D.M., 125 Wis. 2d 170, 176 , 370 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1985); C.W., 142 Wis. 2d at 766. [19] In State v. Way, 113 Wis. 2d 82, 91 , 334 N.W.2d 918 (Ct. App. 1983), the court of appeals refused to reverse a *974 sentence on the ground that there was a factual error in the presentence report, stating that it found that there were "sufficient other facts presented in the record which would justify the trial court sentencing" as it did. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Hegwood
green
1 sentence1989Id. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
American Orthodontics Corp. v. G & H Insurance Agency, Inc.
green
2 sentences1987Agency, Inc., 77 Wis. 2d 337, 343 , 253 N.W.2d 82 (1977). 1987Agency, Inc., 77 Wis. 2d 337, 343 , 253 N.W.2d 82 (1977). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| State v. Upchurch green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| State v. Bettinger green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Burke v. Poeschl Brothers, Inc. green | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.