Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
19 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2026 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
Northern States Power Co. v. Bughergreen2 sentences2025See Northern States Power Co. v. Bugher, 189 Wis. 2d 541, 550 , 525 N.W.2d 723 (1995) (“The term claim preclusion replaces res judicata.”). 2025See Northern States Power Co. v. Bugher, 189 Wis. 2d 541, 550 , 525 N.W.2d 723 (1995) (“The term claim preclusion replaces res judicata.”). | 4 | 6 |
Kruckenberg v. Harveygreen2 sentences2023See Kruckenberg v. Harvey, 2005 WI 43 , ¶18 n.11, 279 Wis. 2d 520 , 694 N.W.2d 879 (instructing that the term issue preclusion should be used instead of collateral estoppel and that the term claim preclusion should be used instead of res judicata). 6 No. 2021AP715 determine “whether there are any genuine issues of disputed facts that are material to the complaint’s claim.” Id. ¶13 Summary judgment must be granted if “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact a 2023See Kruckenberg v. Harvey, 2005 WI 43 , ¶18 n.11, 279 Wis. 2d 520 , 694 N.W.2d 879 (instructing that the term issue preclusion should be used instead of collateral estoppel and that the term claim preclusion should be used instead of res judicata). 6 No. 2021AP715 determine “whether there are any genuine issues of disputed facts that are material to the complaint’s claim.” Id. ¶13 Summary judgment must be granted if “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact a | 1 | 1 |
State v. Emmanuel Earl Trammellgreen2 sentences2021See State v. Trammell, 2019 WI 59, ¶2 , 387 Wis. 2d 156 , 928 N.W.2d 564 (“We conclude that [the defendant] waived his right to object to the use of Wis JI—Criminal 140 by failing to object to its use at the jury instruction and verdict conference, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 805.13 (3).”). 8 No. 2018AP2128-CR jurisdiction. 2021See State v. Trammell, 2019 WI 59, ¶2 , 387 Wis. 2d 156 , 928 N.W.2d 564 (“We conclude that [the defendant] waived his right to object to the use of Wis JI—Criminal 140 by failing to object to its use at the jury instruction and verdict conference, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 805.13 (3).”). 8 No. 2018AP2128-CR jurisdiction. | 1 | 1 |
Diaz v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2007Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this context, we conclude the term forfeiture is more appropriate 'because the phrase 'forfeiture by wrongdoing1 better reflects the legal principles that underpin the doctrine." Commonwealth v. Edwards, 830 N.E.2d 158 , 168 n.16 (Mass. 2005). 2007Seemingly as dicta, the Court stated the following: "We reiterate what we said in Crawford : that `the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing . . . extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.' That is, one who obtains the absence of a witness by wrongdoing forfeits the constitutional right to confrontation." Id. at 2280 (quoting Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)) (citations omitted). [13] Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 , 32 S.Ct. 250 , 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this | 1 | 1 |
unempl.ins.rep. Cch 22,077 Harry T. Edmundson v. Borough of Kennett Square Robert F. Goddu Kenneth Roberts Herbert L. Waltz Albert J. McCarthygreen1 sentence1995See, e.g., Edmundson v. Borough of Kennett Squares, 4 F.3d 186, 188 (3rd Cir. 1993); Gregory, 843 F.2d at 116 . | 1 | 1 |
Pagliaro v. Coxgreen2 sentences1991In Pagliaro , the court said that, "The allowance of good time, until earned for the entire term is a privilege which is conditioned expressly by . . . statute . . . allowing it upon a record of conduct showing `that he has faithfully observed all the rules and has not been subjected to punishment.'" Pagliaro, 143 F.2d at 901 (citations omitted). 1991In Pagliaro , the court said that, "The allowance of good time, until earned for the entire term is a privilege which is conditioned expressly by . . . statute . . . allowing it upon a record of conduct showing 'that he has faithfully observed all the rules and has not been subjected to punishment.' " Pagliaro, 143 F.2d at 901 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Vickgreen2 sentences1988This discretion extends to both choice of language and emphasis.” State v. Vick, 104 Wis. 2d 678, 690 , 312 N.W.2d 489, 495 (1981) (citations omitted). 1988This discretion extends to both choice of language and emphasis.” State v. Vick, 104 Wis. 2d 678, 690 , 312 N.W.2d 489, 495 (1981) (citations omitted). | 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. Ndina
green
2 sentences2026“Although cases sometimes use the words ‘forfeiture’ and ‘waiver’ interchangeably, the two words embody very different legal concepts. ‘Whereas forfeiture is the failure to make the timely assertion of a right, waiver is the intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right.’” State v. Ndina, 2009 WI 21, ¶¶28-32 , 315 Wis. 2d 653 , 761 N.W.2d 612 (citation omitted). 2010There are 776 Wisconsin statutes that contain some form of the word "waive." Our holding in this case is not intended to define waiver in every such statute as requiring the intentional relinquishment of a known right. 2010) ("While the parties and relevant case law use the word 'waiver,' we use the word 'forfeiture' consistent with the terminology adopted by Ndina, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 29 ."); Obriecht v. Law Offices of Lettenberger Glasbrenner, S.C., No. 2008AP3092, unpublished slip op., ¶ 18 n.7 (Wis. Ct. App. July 30, 2009) (noting that relevant precedent used the term waiver but relying on Nd | 3 | 2010–2026 |
State v. Kleven
green
1 sentence2020In that way, any amount of initial confinement based on a penalty enhancer would cause the sentence to exceed the five-year maximum imprisonment for the underlying offense and, as a result, avoid any Harris violation regarding Kleven’s sentence. 14 No. 2019AP1785-CR ¶33 Fifth, in Kleven, 280 Wis. 2d 468 , ¶18 n.4, this court stated that: The better practice for sentencing courts [is to impose the overall sentence] without allocating any portions of the confinement imposed among the base offense and enhancers. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Kaczmarski
green
2 sentences2010There are 776 Wisconsin statutes that contain some form of the word "waive." Our holding in this case is not intended to define waiver in every such statute as requiring the intentional relinquishment of a known right. 2010) ("While the parties and relevant case law use the word 'waiver,' we use the word 'forfeiture' consistent with the terminology adopted by Ndina, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 29 ."); Obriecht v. Law Offices of Lettenberger Glasbrenner, S.C., No. 2008AP3092, unpublished slip op., ¶ 18 n.7 (Wis. Ct. App. July 30, 2009) (noting that relevant precedent used the term waiver but relying on Nd 2010There are 776 Wisconsin statutes that contain some form of the word "waive." Our holding in this case is not intended to define waiver in every such statute as requiring the intentional relinquishment of a known right. 2010) ("While the parties and relevant case law use the word 'waiver,' we use the word 'forfeiture' consistent with the terminology adopted by Ndina, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 29 ."); Obriecht v. Law Offices of Lettenberger Glasbrenner, S.C., No. 2008AP3092, unpublished slip op., ¶ 18 n.7 (Wis. Ct. App. July 30, 2009) (noting that relevant precedent used the term waiver but relying on Nd | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Miller
green
2 sentences2010There are 776 Wisconsin statutes that contain some form of the word "waive." Our holding in this case is not intended to define waiver in every such statute as requiring the intentional relinquishment of a known right. 2010) ("While the parties and relevant case law use the word 'waiver,' we use the word 'forfeiture' consistent with the terminology adopted by Ndina, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 29 ."); Obriecht v. Law Offices of Lettenberger Glasbrenner, S.C., No. 2008AP3092, unpublished slip op., ¶ 18 n.7 (Wis. Ct. App. July 30, 2009) (noting that relevant precedent used the term waiver but relying on Nd 2010There are 776 Wisconsin statutes that contain some form of the word "waive." Our holding in this case is not intended to define waiver in every such statute as requiring the intentional relinquishment of a known right. 2010) ("While the parties and relevant case law use the word 'waiver,' we use the word 'forfeiture' consistent with the terminology adopted by Ndina, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 29 ."); Obriecht v. Law Offices of Lettenberger Glasbrenner, S.C., No. 2008AP3092, unpublished slip op., ¶ 18 n.7 (Wis. Ct. App. July 30, 2009) (noting that relevant precedent used the term waiver but relying on Nd | 1 | 2010–2010 |
In RE MARRIAGE OF PLONKA v. Plonka
green
2 sentences2010Plonka v. Plonka, 177 Wis. 2d 196, 200-01 , 501 N.W.2d 871 (Ct. App. 1993). ¶ 22. 2010Plonka v. Plonka, 177 Wis. 2d 196, 200-01 , 501 N.W.2d 871 (Ct. App. 1993). ¶ 22. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Crawford v. Washington
green
2 sentences2007Seemingly as dicta, the Court stated the following: "We reiterate what we said in Crawford : that `the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing . . . extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.' That is, one who obtains the absence of a witness by wrongdoing forfeits the constitutional right to confrontation." Id. at 2280 (quoting Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)) (citations omitted). [13] Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 , 32 S.Ct. 250 , 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this 2007Seemingly as dicta, the Court stated the following: "We reiterate what we said in Crawford : that `the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing . . . extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.' That is, one who obtains the absence of a witness by wrongdoing forfeits the constitutional right to confrontation." Id. at 2280 (quoting Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)) (citations omitted). [13] Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 , 32 S.Ct. 250 , 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Commonwealth v. Edwards
green
2 sentences2007Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this context, we conclude the term forfeiture is more appropriate 'because the phrase 'forfeiture by wrongdoing1 better reflects the legal principles that underpin the doctrine." Commonwealth v. Edwards, 830 N.E.2d 158 , 168 n.16 (Mass. 2005). 2007Seemingly as dicta, the Court stated the following: "We reiterate what we said in Crawford : that `the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing . . . extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.' That is, one who obtains the absence of a witness by wrongdoing forfeits the constitutional right to confrontation." Id. at 2280 (quoting Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)) (citations omitted). [13] Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 , 32 S.Ct. 250 , 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Davis v. Washington
green
1 sentence2007Seemingly as dicta, the Court stated the following: "We reiterate what we said in Crawford : that `the rule of forfeiture by wrongdoing . . . extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.' That is, one who obtains the absence of a witness by wrongdoing forfeits the constitutional right to confrontation." Id. at 2280 (quoting Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)) (citations omitted). [13] Although Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 451-53 , 32 S.Ct. 250 , 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), and other courts have used the term waiver in this | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Yauger v. SKIING ENTERPRISES, INC.
green
2 sentences2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. 2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Merten v. Nathan
green
2 sentences2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. 2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Richards v. Richards
green
2 sentences2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. 2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Dobratz v. Thomson
green
2 sentences2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. 2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center
green
2 sentences2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. 2005There have been no material changes to this statute since this time. [1] See, e.g., Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Ctr., 2005 WI 4, ¶ 12 , 277 Wis. 2d 303 , 691 N.W.2d 334 ; Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205, 210-11 , 321 N.W.2d 173 (1982). [2] The cases to which the article refers are Atkins, 277 Wis. 2d 303 ; Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60 (1996); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007 , 513 N.W.2d 118 (1994); Dobratz v. Thomson, 161 Wis. 2d 502 , 468 N.W.2d 654 (1991); Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Black v. Goodwin, Loomis & Britton, Inc.
green
1 sentence2003Russ & Thomas F. Segalla, Couch on Insurance § 202:9 (3d ed. 1999 & Supp. 2002) (Reasonableness of Settlement and Good Faith in Making It). [2] Black v. Goodwin, Loomis & Britton, Inc., 681 A.2d 293 (Conn. 1996). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Blannie S. Wilson, Administratrix of the Estate of Henry J. Wilson, Deceased v. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation
green
1 sentence1999Ct. App. 1988). 24 Wilson v. Johns-Manville, 684 F.2d at 119 . 25 The term claim preclusion replaces res judicata', the term issue preclusion replaces collateral estoppel. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Gregory v. Chehi
green
1 sentence1995See, e.g., Edmundson v. Borough of Kennett Squares, 4 F.3d 186, 188 (3rd Cir. 1993); Gregory, 843 F.2d at 116 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education
green
1 sentence1995Bd. of Educ., 465 U.S. 75 (1984). 3 *550 We join in this trend and adopt the terms "claim preclusion" and "issue preclusion." The term claim preclusion replaces res judicata; the term issue preclusion replaces collateral estoppel. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.