rationale behind rule (Wisconsin) · Go Syfert
← Wisconsin issues

rationale behind rule in Wisconsin

13 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1963–2017 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingstongreen
scotus · 1964 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015The rationale behind the presumption associated with procedural arbitrability is that it advances the public policy of encouraging arbitration and enforcing arbitration agreements, see First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; promotes arbitration's goal of speedy dispute resolution, see John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543, 558-59 (1964); and prevents courts from ruling on the merits of an underlying claim when determining whether to compel arbitration, see Cirilli, 322 Wis. 2d 238, ¶¶ 13, 17-18 .

11
Cirilli v. Country Insurance & Financial Servicesgreen
wisctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015The rationale behind the presumption associated with procedural arbitrability is that it advances the public policy of encouraging arbitration and enforcing arbitration agreements, see First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; promotes arbitration's goal of speedy dispute resolution, see John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543, 558-59 (1964); and prevents courts from ruling on the merits of an underlying claim when determining whether to compel arbitration, see Cirilli, 322 Wis. 2d 238, ¶¶ 13, 17-18 .

11
Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, G.A.P., Inc.green
wisctapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis. 2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct. App. 1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the rationale behind the rule to prevent its application within the four corners of the same lawsuit.").

2007Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis. 2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct. App. 1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the rationale behind the rule to prevent its application within the four corners of the same lawsuit.").

11
Annette Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Companygreen
ca11 · 1988 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
1 sentence

1997See Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 847 F.2d 725, 729 (11th Cir. 1988). 7 The rationale behind this rule was explained *257 succinctly in Central Milk Producers Coop. v. Sentry Food Stores, Inc., 573 F.2d 988, 992 (8th Cir. 1978), when the court held that "[t]his court will not allow a litigant to delay filing a motion to disqualify in order to use the motion as a later tool to deprive his opponent of counsel of his choice after substantial preparation of a case has been completed." Additionally, the related but distinct equitable doctrine of laches has been held to apply to an attorney di

11
Central Milk Producers Cooperative, Central Milk Sales Agency, Associated Milk Producers, Inc. v. Sentry Food Stores, Inc.green
ca8 · 1978 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
1 sentence

1997See Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 847 F.2d 725, 729 (11th Cir. 1988). 7 The rationale behind this rule was explained *257 succinctly in Central Milk Producers Coop. v. Sentry Food Stores, Inc., 573 F.2d 988, 992 (8th Cir. 1978), when the court held that "[t]his court will not allow a litigant to delay filing a motion to disqualify in order to use the motion as a later tool to deprive his opponent of counsel of his choice after substantial preparation of a case has been completed." Additionally, the related but distinct equitable doctrine of laches has been held to apply to an attorney di

11
Jackson v. JC Penney Co., Inc.green
gand · 1981 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
1 sentence

1997Penny Co., 521 F. Supp. 1032, 1034 (N.D.

11
State v. Pohgreen
wis · 1984 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993
2 sentences

1993State v. Poh, 116 Wis. 2d 510, 529 , 343 N.W.2d 108, 118-119 (1984). [2] The following two scenarios demonstrate the rationale behind this rule: 1) A man is seriously injured as the result of the defendant's negligence.

1993State v. Poh, 116 Wis. 2d 510, 529 , 343 N.W.2d 108, 118-119 (1984). [2] The following two scenarios demonstrate the rationale behind this rule: 1) A man is seriously injured as the result of the defendant's negligence.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (12)

CaseCitedYears
Hermann v. Town of Delavan green
wis · 1998
2 sentences

2017Hermann, 215 Wis. 2d at 377 . 41 No. 2015AP1523.ssa assessor all of the information about income and expenses that the assessor requests.51 ¶213 At the turn of the last century, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Joshua Eric Dodge eloquently explained the rationale behind the principle that the taxpayer who has information must disgorge the information (to which the taxing authority does not have access) in order to challenge the assessment, to ensure that the property owner and the taxing entity have a "level playing field" before the decision maker so that the decision maker can allocate the bu

2017Hermann, 215 Wis. 2d at 377 . 41 No. 2015AP1523.ssa assessor all of the information about income and expenses that the assessor requests.51 ¶213 At the turn of the last century, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Joshua Eric Dodge eloquently explained the rationale behind the principle that the taxpayer who has information must disgorge the information (to which the taxing authority does not have access) in order to challenge the assessment, to ensure that the property owner and the taxing entity have a "level playing field" before the decision maker so that the decision maker can allocate the bu

32017–2017
First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan green
scotus · 1995
2 sentences

2015Howsam, 537 U.S. at 83-84 ; First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; see also Kimberly Area Sch.

2015The rationale behind the presumption associated with procedural arbitrability is that it advances the public policy of encouraging arbitration and enforcing arbitration agreements, see First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; promotes arbitration's goal of speedy dispute resolution, see John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543, 558-59 (1964); and prevents courts from ruling on the merits of an underlying claim when determining whether to compel arbitration, see Cirilli, 322 Wis. 2d 238, ¶¶ 13, 17-18 .

32015–2015
Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. green
scotus · 2002
2 sentences

2015Howsam, 537 U.S. at 83-84 ; First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; see also Kimberly Area Sch.

2015Howsam, 537 U.S. at 83-84 ; First Options, 514 U.S. at 945 ; see also Kimberly Area Sch.

32015–2015
Paige K. B. v. Steven G. B. green
wis · 1999
2 sentences

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

12007–2007
Payne v. Milwaukee Sanitarium Foundation, Inc. green
wis · 1977
2 sentences

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

12007–2007
Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp. green
wis · 1991
2 sentences

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

12007–2007
Mrozek v. Intra Financial Corp. green
wis · 2005
2 sentences

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

12007–2007
State v. Hutnik green
wis · 1968
2 sentences

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

2007Corp., 2005 WI 73, ¶ 15 , 281 Wis.2d 448 , 699 N.W.2d 54 ("[W]hether the circuit court properly applied, or refused to apply, issue preclusion in an individual case is a discretionary decision."). [17] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [18] Paige K.B., 226 Wis.2d at 225 , 594 N.W.2d 370 . [19] Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 162 Wis.2d 261, 273 , 470 N.W.2d 859 (1991). [20] State v. Hutnik, 39 Wis.2d 754, 763 , 159 N.W.2d 733 (1968). [21] Precision Erecting, Inc. v. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank, 224 Wis.2d 288, 302 , 592 N.W.2d 5 (Ct.App.1998) ("[T]here is nothing in the ration

12007–2007
Hendrickson v. State green
wis · 1973
2 sentences

2000This is not so much a matter of relaxing the general rule that it is not competent in a prosecution for one crime to introduce evidence of other offenses as it is a matter of placing testimony concerning other acts or incidents within one of the well established exceptions to such rule. . . ." Hendrickson v. State, 61 Wis. 2d 275, 279 , 212 N.W.2d 481 (1973).

2000This is not so much a matter of relaxing the general rule that it is not competent in a prosecution for one crime to introduce evidence of other offenses as it is a matter of placing testimony concerning other acts or incidents within one of the well established exceptions to such rule. . . ." Hendrickson v. State, 61 Wis. 2d 275, 279 , 212 N.W.2d 481 (1973).

12000–2000
State v. Stevens green
wis · 1994
2 sentences

1996"In fact, by announcing their presence, police may actually increase the likelihood for violence." Id. at 428 .

1996"In fact, by announcing their presence, police may actually increase the likelihood for violence." Id. at 428 .

11996–1996
Milbrandt v. American Legion Post of Mora green
minn · 1985
1 sentence

1989The rationale behind this rule is that "[s]ince the no-fault insurer assesses premiums to pay for injury to its insured regardless of fault, the insurer is paying out only what its insured paid for, and thus would receive a windfall if allowed to recover from the tortfeasor basic economic loss benefits paid the insured." Id. at 705-06 .

11989–1989
Union National Bank v. Roberts green
· 1878
1 sentence

1963Bank v. Roberts (1878), 45 Wis. 373 , 379: “For it would be manifestly unjust to allow a plaintiff to recover for the use of his assignor, what the assignor could not recover for himself.” Although Standard has affirmed the contract with Libman and cannot assert the defense of fraud as against either the payee (Libman) or the transferee (plaintiff) by analogy it would be manifestly unjust to allow the plaintiff to recover the full amount of the note ($6,200 less the alleged $451 credit) only to turn it over to the pledgor (Libman) when the pledgor himself faces an action in fraud for damages a

11963–1963

Statutes the citing opinions construe

WI § Wis. Stat. § 802.08 (4) WI § Wis. Stat. § 66.0119 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.01 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.045 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.48 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.49 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.501 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 70.503 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 73.03 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 74.37 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 804.10 (3) WI § Wis. Stat. § 905.04 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

IL 127 (1972–2026) CA 103 (1961–2025) OH 87 (1956–2026) IN 80 (1978–2025) TX 79 (1964–2022) PA 67 (1965–2024) AR 47 (1982–2026) FL 42 (1971–2024) AL 36 (1980–2025) NY 35 (1930–2024) TN 34 (1981–2025) MD 28 (1978–2025) LA 28 (1980–2024) WA 28 (1972–2026) MI 25 (1975–2016) IA 25 (1967–2025) MO 25 (1980–2021) WV 24 (1978–2024) MS 23 (1985–2023) AZ 21 (1969–2021) CT 21 (1974–2025) MT 20 (1969–2022) KY 18 (1979–2024) KS 18 (1975–2025) MA 17 (1979–2025) OR 17 (1975–2026) RI 16 (1984–2024) NC 15 (1980–2025) VA 15 (1993–2022) NM 14 (1989–2025) CO 13 (1976–2022) WI 13 (1963–2017) NH 12 (1991–2023) OK 11 (1981–2002) DC 11 (1977–2004) UT 11 (1989–2021) ID 10 (1991–2025) GA 10 (1978–2022) NJ 9 (1965–2015) ME 9 (1975–2020) SC 8 (1989–2025) AK 7 (1979–1994) SD 7 (1986–2016) WY 7 (1983–2020) HI 6 (1998–2021) MN 5 (1956–2017) NE 4 (1982–2007) VT 3 (2023–2024) DE 3 (1975–1980) NV 2 (1984–1992) ND 2 (2009–2009)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check