frivolous claim in Wisconsin

2021In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Crandall, 2008 WI 14 , 307 Wis. 2d 536 , 745 N.W.2d 679 . ¶5 In addition to the public reprimand in 2008, Attorney Crandall's Wisconsin law license was suspended for 30 days as reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the Minnesota Supreme 2 No. 2019AP1845-D Court for failing to act with diligence and promptness, failing to communicate with clients, engaging in conduct involving dishonesty and misrepresentation, and failing to cooperate with the Minnesota disciplinary investigation.

2021In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Crandall, 2008 WI 14 , 307 Wis. 2d 536 , 745 N.W.2d 679 . ¶5 In addition to the public reprimand in 2008, Attorney Crandall's Wisconsin law license was suspended for 30 days as reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the Minnesota Supreme 2 No. 2019AP1845-D Court for failing to act with diligence and promptness, failing to communicate with clients, engaging in conduct involving dishonesty and misrepresentation, and failing to cooperate with the Minnesota disciplinary investigation.

2021In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Crandall, 2006 WI 6 , 287 Wis. 2d 102 , 708 N.W.2d 690 . ¶4 In 2008, Attorney Crandall was publicly reprimanded for advancing a frivolous claim, failing to file a client's affidavit or a brief in opposition to a motion for summary judgment, failing to keep clients reasonably informed, failing to return clients' files in a timely manner, and failing to cooperate with the OLR's investigation.

2021In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Crandall, 2006 WI 6 , 287 Wis. 2d 102 , 708 N.W.2d 690 . ¶4 In 2008, Attorney Crandall was publicly reprimanded for advancing a frivolous claim, failing to file a client's affidavit or a brief in opposition to a motion for summary judgment, failing to keep clients reasonably informed, failing to return clients' files in a timely manner, and failing to cooperate with the OLR's investigation.

2020Nora I, 173 Wis. 2d at 660-61 ; see also In re Disciplinary Action Against Nora, 450 N.W.2d 328 (Minn. 1990). ¶8 In 2018 this court suspended Attorney Nora's license to practice law in this state for a period of one year, effective April 30, 2018.

2018Nora I , 173 Wis. 2d at 660 -61 , 495 N.W.2d 99 ; see also In re Disciplinary Action Against Nora , 450 N.W.2d 328 (Minn. 1990).

2023Thus, he contends, the record is clear that the only reason for Nancy and Tim to bring a frivolous claim against him was for an improper purpose: harassment, embarrassment, and forcing him out of his position as company president. 31 No. 2020AP1937 ¶63 “The tort of abuse of process is a vague, yet simple, concept”: “One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for harm caused by the abuse of process.” Schmit v. Klumpyan, 2003 WI App 107, ¶6 , 264 Wis. 2d 414 , 663 N.

2023Thus, he contends, the record is clear that the only reason for Nancy and Tim to bring a frivolous claim against him was for an improper purpose: harassment, embarrassment, and forcing him out of his position as company president. 31 No. 2020AP1937 ¶63 “The tort of abuse of process is a vague, yet simple, concept”: “One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for harm caused by the abuse of process.” Schmit v. Klumpyan, 2003 WI App 107, ¶6 , 264 Wis. 2d 414 , 663 N.

2020In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2010 WI 11 , 322 Wis. 2d 518 , 778 N.W.2d 645 .

2020In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2010 WI 11 , 322 Wis. 2d 518 , 778 N.W.2d 645 .

2016P'ship, 2004 WI 92, ¶33 , 273 Wis. 2d 577 , 682 N.W.2d 839 (citing Osman v. Phipps, 2002 WI App 170, ¶¶8, 12 , 256 Wis. 2d 589 , 649 N.W.2d 701 ) ("[I]nterest may not be imposed unless an actual judgment is entered in a case."); see also Tomsen v. Secura Ins., 2003 WI App 187, ¶10 , 266 Wis. 2d 491 , 668 N.W.2d 794 (interest awarded when judgment was recovered based on a stipulation). 26 No. 2015AP179 defending against a frivolous claim brought before the repeal of § 814.025, had a "vested right."32 ¶75 The Trinity court concluded that "[t]he legislature did not create a substantive, vested ri

2016P'ship, 2004 WI 92, ¶33 , 273 Wis. 2d 577 , 682 N.W.2d 839 (citing Osman v. Phipps, 2002 WI App 170, ¶¶8, 12 , 256 Wis. 2d 589 , 649 N.W.2d 701 ) ("[I]nterest may not be imposed unless an actual judgment is entered in a case."); see also Tomsen v. Secura Ins., 2003 WI App 187, ¶10 , 266 Wis. 2d 491 , 668 N.W.2d 794 (interest awarded when judgment was recovered based on a stipulation). 26 No. 2015AP179 defending against a frivolous claim brought before the repeal of § 814.025, had a "vested right."32 ¶75 The Trinity court concluded that "[t]he legislature did not create a substantive, vested ri

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008See, e.g., Howell v. Denomie, 2005 WI 81, ¶ 19 , 282 Wis. 2d 130 , 698 N.W.2d 621 (concluding that the court of appeals may inquire, on its own motion, whether a frivolous claim has been filed); City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 226 Wis. 2d 738, ¶ 19 , 595 N.W.2d 635 (1999) (recognizing the inherent power of courts to vacate void judgments); State v. Peterson, 104 Wis. 2d 616, 628 , 312 N.W.2d 784 (1981) (holding that a circuit court may amend pleadings on its own motion); State v. Hanson, 85 Wis. 2d 233, 237 , 270 N.W.2d 212 (1978) (stating that a circuit court "may on its own motion reopen [a ca

2008Co., 57 Wis. 2d 183, 188 , 203 N.W.2d 655 (1973) (concluding that circuit courts may, on their own motion, grant a new trial in the interests of justice). 12 The wide recognition of courts' abilities to act sua sponte comports with the balance of the interests served by § 806.07, fairness and finality.

2008Co., 57 Wis. 2d 183, 188 , 203 N.W.2d 655 (1973) (concluding that circuit courts may, on their own motion, grant a new trial in the interests of justice). 12 The wide recognition of courts' abilities to act sua sponte comports with the balance of the interests served by § 806.07, fairness and finality.

2007First, § 814.025 provided that, as a sanction for filing or continuing a frivolous claim, reasonable attorney fees must be paid to the prevailing party. 9 Jandrt v. Jerome Foods, Inc., 227 Wis. 2d 531, 576 , 597 N.W.2d 744 (1999); Sommer v. Carr, 99 Wis. 2d 789, 799 , 299 N.W.2d 856 (1981); Stoll v. Adriansen, 122 Wis. 2d 503, 511 , 362 N.W.2d 182 (Ct. App. 1984).

2007First, § 814.025 provided that, as a sanction for filing or continuing a frivolous claim, reasonable attorney fees must be paid to the prevailing party. 9 Jandrt v. Jerome Foods, Inc., 227 Wis. 2d 531, 576 , 597 N.W.2d 744 (1999); Sommer v. Carr, 99 Wis. 2d 789, 799 , 299 N.W.2d 856 (1981); Stoll v. Adriansen, 122 Wis. 2d 503, 511 , 362 N.W.2d 182 (Ct. App. 1984).

2006As we have explained, an assessor's valuation of a property comes before both the board of review and a reviewing court clothed with a presumption that it is "correct." Moreover, the board's resolution of conflicts in testimony regarding the correctness of the assessor's valuation is entitled to considerable deference — " '[i]f there is credible evidence before the board that may in any reasonable view support the assessor's valuation, that valuation must be upheld.'" Rosen v. City of Milwaukee, 72 Wis. 2d 653, 661-62 , 242 N.W.2d 681 (1976) (citations omitted).

2006As we have explained, an assessor's valuation of a property comes before both the board of review and a reviewing court clothed with a presumption that it is "correct." Moreover, the board's resolution of conflicts in testimony regarding the correctness of the assessor's valuation is entitled to considerable deference — " '[i]f there is credible evidence before the board that may in any reasonable view support the assessor's valuation, that valuation must be upheld.'" Rosen v. City of Milwaukee, 72 Wis. 2d 653, 661-62 , 242 N.W.2d 681 (1976) (citations omitted).

1999In Johnson v. Calado, 159 Wis. 2d 446 , 464 N.W.2d 647 (1991), in what is admittedly dicta, we wrote that Wis. Stat. § 814.025 may "in a proper case, provide full compensation for reasonable attorney fees necessary to defend against a frivolous claim." Id. at 462 .

1999In Johnson v. Calado, 159 Wis. 2d 446 , 464 N.W.2d 647 (1991), in what is admittedly dicta, we wrote that Wis. Stat. § 814.025 may "in a proper case, provide full compensation for reasonable attorney fees necessary to defend against a frivolous claim." Id. at 462 .