12 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Waukesha County Department of Social Services v. C.E.W.green2 sentences2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1 , ถ17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. งง 802.10(7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. ง 805.18(2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but c 2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 802.10 (7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but | 2 | 2 |
Evelyn C. R. v. Tykila S.green2 sentences2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1 , ถ17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. งง 802.10(7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. ง 805.18(2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but c 2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 802.10 (7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but | 1 | 3 |
Brandon Apparel Group, Inc. v. Pearson Properties, Ltd.green1 sentence2020Brandon Apparel, 247 Wis. 2d 521, ¶11 (internal citations omitted). ¶24 L.C. argues that the trial court’s failure to use the terms “clear and justifiable excuse” shows that the trial court did not analyze the second step of the sanction analysis. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wildgreen2 sentences1998See State v. Wild, 146 Wis. 2d 18, 28 , 429 N.W.2d 105, 109 (Ct. App. 1988). 6 We affirm discretionary determinations if the court considered the relevant facts, applied the proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrative rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach. 1998See State v. Wild, 146 Wis. 2d 18, 28 , 429 N.W.2d 105, 109 (Ct. App. 1988). 6 We affirm discretionary determinations if the court considered the relevant facts, applied the proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrative rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach. | 1 | 1 |
State Ex Rel. Keefe v. Schmiegegreen1 sentence1993Schmeige, 251 Wis. 79, 84 (1946). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Town of Delafield v. Winkelman
green
2 sentences2005As a result of this holding, it is argued that the zoning violator now has "`two kicks at the cat,' once to defend against the claim that there is a violation and, second, to defend against enforcement of a sanction for that violation." Vill. of Hobart, 271 Wis. 2d 268 , ¶ 25 n.11 (quoting Town of Delafied v. Winkelman, 2003 WI *647 App 92, ¶ 1, 264 Wis. 2d 264 , 663 N.W.2d 324 ). 2005As a result of this holding, it is argued that the zoning violator now has "`two kicks at the cat,' once to defend against the claim that there is a violation and, second, to defend against enforcement of a sanction for that violation." Vill. of Hobart, 271 Wis. 2d 268 , ¶ 25 n.11 (quoting Town of Delafied v. Winkelman, 2003 WI *647 App 92, ¶ 1, 264 Wis. 2d 264 , 663 N.W.2d 324 ). | 3 | 2004–2005 |
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Kelly
green
2 sentences2013In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kelly, 2012 WI 55, ¶ 24 , 341 Wis. 2d 104 , 814 N.W.2d 844 ; In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Semancik, 2005 WI 139, ¶ 26 , 286 Wis. 2d 24 , 704 N.W.2d 581 . ¶ 25. 2013In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kelly, 2012 WI 55, ¶ 24 , 341 Wis. 2d 104 , 814 N.W.2d 844 ; In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Semancik, 2005 WI 139, ¶ 26 , 286 Wis. 2d 24 , 704 N.W.2d 581 . ¶ 25. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Semancik
neutral
2 sentences2013In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kelly, 2012 WI 55, ¶ 24 , 341 Wis. 2d 104 , 814 N.W.2d 844 ; In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Semancik, 2005 WI 139, ¶ 26 , 286 Wis. 2d 24 , 704 N.W.2d 581 . ¶ 25. 2013In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kelly, 2012 WI 55, ¶ 24 , 341 Wis. 2d 104 , 814 N.W.2d 844 ; In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Semancik, 2005 WI 139, ¶ 26 , 286 Wis. 2d 24 , 704 N.W.2d 581 . ¶ 25. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
In Re Interest of Brandon SS
green
2 sentences2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1 , ถ17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. งง 802.10(7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. ง 805.18(2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but c 2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 802.10 (7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but | 2 | 2004–2004 |
In Interest of JAB
green
2 sentences2004Dep't, 153 Wis. 2d 761 , 765, 451 N.W.2d 799 (Ct. App. 1989) (same). ¶ 33. 2004Dep't, 153 Wis. 2d 761 , 765, 451 N.W.2d 799 (Ct. App. 1989) (same). ¶ 33. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Door County Department of Health & Family Services v. Scott S.
green
2 sentences2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 802.10 (7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but 2004Parental rights termination proceedings under Chapter 48 are civil proceedings, and this general rule of civil procedure applicability has been cited in the context of TPR cases on numerous occasions: Evelyn C.R., 246 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 17 (default judgment as a sanction for violation of a court order pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 802.10 (7), 804.12(2)(a), and 805.03 is available in TPR proceedings; also, the harmless error rule of Wis. Stat. § 805.18 (2) applies in TPR cases); Brandon S.S., 179 Wis. 2d at 143-44 , (citing the general rule that the civil procedure code governs Chapter 48 proceedings but | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Hefty v. Strickhouser
green
2 sentences2020Under that standard, we affirm the circuit court if it “examined the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrated rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach.” Hefty v. Strickhouser, 2008 WI 96, ¶71 , 312 Wis. 2d 530 , 752 N.W.2d 820 . ¶15 Third, the circuit court determined that, as a sanction for its violation of the scheduling order, Rural would not be allowed to offer any lay witness testimony at trial. 2020Under that standard, we affirm the circuit court if it “examined the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrated rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach.” Hefty v. Strickhouser, 2008 WI 96, ¶71 , 312 Wis. 2d 530 , 752 N.W.2d 820 . ¶15 Third, the circuit court determined that, as a sanction for its violation of the scheduling order, Rural would not be allowed to offer any lay witness testimony at trial. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Village of Hobart v. Brown County
green
2 sentences2005As a result of this holding, it is argued that the zoning violator now has "`two kicks at the cat,' once to defend against the claim that there is a violation and, second, to defend against enforcement of a sanction for that violation." Vill. of Hobart, 271 Wis. 2d 268 , ¶ 25 n.11 (quoting Town of Delafied v. Winkelman, 2003 WI *647 App 92, ¶ 1, 264 Wis. 2d 264 , 663 N.W.2d 324 ). 2005As a result of this holding, it is argued that the zoning violator now has " 'two kicks at the cat,' once to defend against the claim that there is a violation and, second, to defend against enforcement of a sanction for that violation." Vill. of Hobart, 271 Wis. 2d 268 , ¶ 25 n.11 (quoting Town of Delafied v. Winkelman, 2003 WI App 92, ¶ 1 , 264 Wis. 2d 264 , 663 N.W.2d 324 ). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
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.