11 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ottman v. Town of Primrosegreen2 sentences2022They contend that BARD had the opportunity to properly plead a certiorari claim and failed to do so, and that it should not be provided a second chance. ¶17 We conclude that, as in Voters With Facts, this matter should be remanded to the circuit court for certiorari review. ¶18 When conducting certiorari review, a court “reviews the record compiled by the municipality and does not take any additional evidence on the merits of the decision.” Id., ¶71 (quoting Ottman v. Town of Primrose, 2011 WI 18, ¶35 , 332 Wis. 2d 3 , 796 N.W.2d 411 ). 2022They contend that BARD had the opportunity to properly plead a certiorari claim and failed to do so, and that it should not be provided a second chance. ¶17 We conclude that, as in Voters With Facts, this matter should be remanded to the circuit court for certiorari review. ¶18 When conducting certiorari review, a court “reviews the record compiled by the municipality and does not take any additional evidence on the merits of the decision.” Id., ¶71 (quoting Ottman v. Town of Primrose, 2011 WI 18, ¶35 , 332 Wis. 2d 3 , 796 N.W.2d 411 ). | 1 | 2 |
Hanlon v. Town of Miltongreen2 sentences2019However, the various holdings in Hanlon v. Town of Milton, 2000 WI 61 , 235 Wis. 2d 597 , 612 N.W.2d 44 , are predicated upon the assumption that both the certiorari claim and the additional civil claims the plaintiff later desires to bring are rooted in the same facts and would be otherwise barred. 2019However, the various holdings in Hanlon v. Town of Milton, 2000 WI 61 , 235 Wis. 2d 597 , 612 N.W.2d 44 , are predicated upon the assumption that both the certiorari claim and the additional civil claims the plaintiff later desires to bring are rooted in the same facts and would be otherwise barred. | 1 | 2 |
Agostini v. Feltongreen1 sentence2019See Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203, 239 (1997). 11 No. 2018AP940 County and the Town, but permitting the certiorari claim against the board of adjustment to proceed. ¶26 Eagle Cove appeals the dismissal of its claims against the County and the Town, as well as the dismissal of its non-certiorari claims against the Oneida County Board of Adjustment, arguing that the circuit court improperly gave the federal court proceedings preclusive effect.8 Eagle Cove also argues that because the disposition of one of its RLUIPA claims in the federal action was based on the federal court’s “admitted error | 1 | 1 |
Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Educationgreen1 sentence2019Bd. of Educ., 465 U.S. 75, 83-84 (1984) (where Allen left open the possibility that claim preclusion might not apply to a § 1983 litigant who could have, but did not, raise the issue, Migra closes that possibility). ¶28 Polk effectively concedes that a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 equal protection challenge could have been earlier asserted in a certiorari challenge that the Board’s determination was not made according to law or was unreasonable, arbitrary, and oppressive. | 1 | 1 |
Thomas D. Nowell v. City of Wausaugreen2 sentences2014See Nowell II, 351 Wis. 2d 1, ¶¶ 43-44 (citing State ex rel. 2014See Nowell II, 351 Wis. 2d 1, ¶ 24 . (2) Application of the certiorari standard to the facts of the case requires affirming the City's nonrenewal of Smith's Class B liquor license. ¶ 18. | 1 | 1 |
Schonscheck v. Paccar, Inc.green1 sentence2014See Schonscheck, 261 Wis. 2d 769, ¶ 20 . | 1 | 1 |
Klinger v. Oneida Countygreen1 sentence2011See Klinger, 149 Wis. 2d at 843 . | 1 | 1 |
Darcel, Inc. v. City of Manitowoc Board of Reviewgreen2 sentences1994See Darcel, Inc. v. Manitowoc Bd. of Review, 137 Wis. 2d 623, 626 , 405 N.W.2d 344 (1987); State ex rel. 1994See Darcel, Inc. v. Manitowoc Bd. of Review, 137 Wis. 2d 623, 626 , 405 N.W.2d 344 (1987); State ex rel. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Waukesha v. City of Waukesha Board of Review
green
1 sentence2025City of Waukesha, 399 Wis. 2d 696, ¶19 . ¶18 Pursuant to the certiorari standard, we review the decision of the DHA administrator, not that of the circuit court. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Schoen v. Board of Fire & Police Commissioners
green
2 sentences2023We accept MPA’s request to declare the proper interpretation of the Rules, as well as address the certiorari standard. ¶10 “On certiorari, we review the decision of the Board, not the decision of the circuit court.” Schoen v. Board of Fire & Police Comm’rs of City of Milwaukee, 2015 WI App 95, ¶14 , 366 Wis. 2d 279 , 873 N.W.2d 232 . 2023We accept MPA’s request to declare the proper interpretation of the Rules, as well as address the certiorari standard. ¶10 “On certiorari, we review the decision of the Board, not the decision of the circuit court.” Schoen v. Board of Fire & Police Comm’rs of City of Milwaukee, 2015 WI App 95, ¶14 , 366 Wis. 2d 279 , 873 N.W.2d 232 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Sliwinski v. BD. OF FIRE AND POLICE COMMISSIONERS
green
2 sentences2023Further, 5 No. 2020AP1770 our review of a statutory certiorari appeal “is limited to whether the Board ‘(1) acted within its jurisdiction; (2) proceeded on a correct theory of law; (3) was arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable; or (4) might have reasonably made the order or finding that it made based on the evidence.’” Sliwinski v. Board of Fire & Police Comm’rs of City of Milwaukee, 2006 WI App 27, ¶12 , 289 Wis. 2d 422 , 711 N.W.2d 271 (citation omitted). 2023Further, 5 No. 2020AP1770 our review of a statutory certiorari appeal “is limited to whether the Board ‘(1) acted within its jurisdiction; (2) proceeded on a correct theory of law; (3) was arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable; or (4) might have reasonably made the order or finding that it made based on the evidence.’” Sliwinski v. Board of Fire & Police Comm’rs of City of Milwaukee, 2006 WI App 27, ¶12 , 289 Wis. 2d 422 , 711 N.W.2d 271 (citation omitted). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Eagle Cove Camp & Conference C v. Town of Woodboro, Wisconsin
green
1 sentence2023See Eagle Cove II, No. 2018AP940, ¶¶15-16; Eagle Cove I, 734 F.3d at 683 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Voters with Facts v. City of Eau Claire
green
1 sentence2022They contend that BARD had the opportunity to properly plead a certiorari claim and failed to do so, and that it should not be provided a second chance. ¶17 We conclude that, as in Voters With Facts, this matter should be remanded to the circuit court for certiorari review. ¶18 When conducting certiorari review, a court “reviews the record compiled by the municipality and does not take any additional evidence on the merits of the decision.” Id., ¶71 (quoting Ottman v. Town of Primrose, 2011 WI 18, ¶35 , 332 Wis. 2d 3 , 796 N.W.2d 411 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Wisconsin Dolls, LLC v. Town of Dell Prairie
green
2 sentences2013Wisconsin Dolls, LLC v. Town of Dell Prairie, 2012 WI 76, ¶¶ 18-19 , 342 Wis. 2d 350 , 815 N.W.2d 690 . 2013Wisconsin Dolls, LLC v. Town of Dell Prairie, 2012 WI 76, ¶¶ 18-19 , 342 Wis. 2d 350 , 815 N.W.2d 690 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State Ex Rel. Smith v. City of Oak Creek
green
2 sentences2013Smith v. City of Oak Creek, 139 Wis. 2d 788 , 407 N.W.2d 901 (1987), applying a certiorari analysis to licensing decisions, but determined that that case was not controlling since the issue was not directly raised or addressed. 2013Smith v. City of Oak Creek, 139 Wis. 2d 788 , 407 N.W.2d 901 (1987), applying a certiorari analysis to licensing decisions, but determined that that case was not controlling since the issue was not directly raised or addressed. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.