16 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1962–2026 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Allen v. Allengreen2 sentences1993"The burden is upon the party alleging error to establish by reference to the record that the error was specifically called to the attention of the trial court." Allen v. Allen, 78 Wis. 2d 263, 270 , 254 N.W.2d 244 (1977). 1993"The burden is upon the party alleging error to establish by reference to the record that the error was specifically called to the attention of the trial court." Allen v. Allen, 78 Wis. 2d 263, 270 , 254 N.W.2d 244 (1977). | 4 | 6 |
Young v. Younggreen2 sentences2023See State v. Rogers, 196 Wis. 2d 817, 827 , 539 N.W.2d 897 (Ct. App. 1995); Delgado, 250 Wis. 2d 689, ¶12 ; Young v. Young, 124 Wis. 2d 306, 316 , 369 N.W.2d 178 (Ct. App. 1985) (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the trial court.”). ¶22 Schroeder did not object when the circuit court made the “trump” comment, nor did he raise the issue in his reconsideration motion. 2023See State v. Rogers, 196 Wis. 2d 817, 827 , 539 N.W.2d 897 (Ct. App. 1995); Delgado, 250 Wis. 2d 689, ¶12 ; Young v. Young, 124 Wis. 2d 306, 316 , 369 N.W.2d 178 (Ct. App. 1985) (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the trial court.”). ¶22 Schroeder did not object when the circuit court made the “trump” comment, nor did he raise the issue in his reconsideration motion. | 2 | 3 |
State v. Rogersgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Rogers, 196 Wis. 2d 817, 827 , 539 N.W.2d 897 (Ct. App. 1995); Delgado, 250 Wis. 2d 689, ¶12 ; Young v. Young, 124 Wis. 2d 306, 316 , 369 N.W.2d 178 (Ct. App. 1985) (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the trial court.”). ¶22 Schroeder did not object when the circuit court made the “trump” comment, nor did he raise the issue in his reconsideration motion. 2023See State v. Rogers, 196 Wis. 2d 817, 827 , 539 N.W.2d 897 (Ct. App. 1995); Delgado, 250 Wis. 2d 689, ¶12 ; Young v. Young, 124 Wis. 2d 306, 316 , 369 N.W.2d 178 (Ct. App. 1985) (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the trial court.”). ¶22 Schroeder did not object when the circuit court made the “trump” comment, nor did he raise the issue in his reconsideration motion. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ledgergreen2 sentences2023Thus, the circuit court did not have any opportunity to address the comment, and we decline to address it.3 See State v. Ledger, 175 Wis. 2d 116, 135 , 499 N.W.2d 198 (Ct. App. 1993) (“[A] party must raise and argue an issue with some prominence to allow the trial court to address the issue and make a ruling.”). 2023Thus, the circuit court did not have any opportunity to address the comment, and we decline to address it.3 See State v. Ledger, 175 Wis. 2d 116, 135 , 499 N.W.2d 198 (Ct. App. 1993) (“[A] party must raise and argue an issue with some prominence to allow the trial court to address the issue and make a ruling.”). | 1 | 1 |
Shadley v. Lloyds of Londongreen2 sentences2019See Shadley v. Lloyds of London, 2009 WI App 165, ¶¶25-27 , 322 Wis. 2d 189 , 776 N.W.2d 838 (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the [circuit] court” because the circuit court has had no opportunity to rule on the issue. (quoted source omitted)). 2019See Shadley v. Lloyds of London, 2009 WI App 165, ¶¶25-27 , 322 Wis. 2d 189 , 776 N.W.2d 838 (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the [circuit] court” because the circuit court has had no opportunity to rule on the issue. (quoted source 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nommensen v. American Continental Insurance
green
2 sentences2023Co., 2001 WI 112, ¶49 , 246 Wis. 2d 132 , 629 N.W.2d 301 (the party alleging error has the burden to show its substantial rights have been violated). 2023Co., 2001 WI 112, ¶49 , 246 Wis. 2d 132 , 629 N.W.2d 301 (the party alleging error has the burden to show its substantial rights have been violated). | 3 | 2020–2023 |
State Ex Rel. Newspapers Inc. v. Showers
green
1 sentence2026Showers, 135 Wis. 2d at 102 . ¶15 In Showers, our supreme court considered whether the open meetings law applied to a meeting of four members of an eleven-member commission, when a two-thirds vote was necessary to pass the budget proposal at issue. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Delgado
green
1 sentence2023See State v. Rogers, 196 Wis. 2d 817, 827 , 539 N.W.2d 897 (Ct. App. 1995); Delgado, 250 Wis. 2d 689, ¶12 ; Young v. Young, 124 Wis. 2d 306, 316 , 369 N.W.2d 178 (Ct. App. 1985) (“The party alleging error has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the error was raised before the trial court.”). ¶22 Schroeder did not object when the circuit court made the “trump” comment, nor did he raise the issue in his reconsideration motion. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Evelyn C. R. v. Tykila S.
green
2 sentences2006See Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) ("No judgment shall be reversed or set aside or new trial granted. . . unless ... it shall appear that the error complained of has affected the substantial rights of the party seeking to reverse or set aside the judgment, or to secure a new trial."); Evelyn C.R. v. Tykila S., 2001 WI 110, ¶ 28 , 246 Wis. 2d 1 , 629 N.W.2d 768 ("For an error to affect the substantial rights of a party, there must be a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the outcome of the action . ..."). *567 ¶ 20. 2006See Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) ("No judgment shall be reversed or set aside or new trial granted. . . unless ... it shall appear that the error complained of has affected the substantial rights of the party seeking to reverse or set aside the judgment, or to secure a new trial."); Evelyn C.R. v. Tykila S., 2001 WI 110, ¶ 28 , 246 Wis. 2d 1 , 629 N.W.2d 768 ("For an error to affect the substantial rights of a party, there must be a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the outcome of the action . ..."). *567 ¶ 20. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Wells v. Dairyland Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences1962Co. (1957), 274 Wis. 505, 515 , 80 N. W. (2d) 380 , wherein we stated: "As to those errors which must be raised by a motion for new trial as a condition precedent to having this court pass thereon as a matter of right, and not discretion, we are constrained to hold that the burden is upon the party alleging error in this court to affirmatively establish by the record before us that such error was specifically called to the trial court's attention in considering the motion for new trial." In order to have succeeded on an appeal from the instant judgment, plaintiff would have had to move for a n 1962Co. (1957), 274 Wis. 505, 515 , 80 N. W. (2d) 380 , wherein we stated: "As to those errors which must be raised by a motion for new trial as a condition precedent to having this court pass thereon as a matter of right, and not discretion, we are constrained to hold that the burden is upon the party alleging error in this court to affirmatively establish by the record before us that such error was specifically called to the trial court's attention in considering the motion for new trial." In order to have succeeded on an appeal from the instant judgment, plaintiff would have had to move for a n | 1 | 1962–1962 |
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.