11 Wisconsin opinions name it 3 courts 1974–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Barker v. Wingogreen2 sentences2025Indeed, “any inquiry into a speedy trial claim necessitates a functional analysis of the right in the particular context of the case.” Barker, 407 U.S. at 522 . 2024See Barker, 407 U.S. at 522 (“[A]ny inquiry into a speedy trial claim necessitates a functional analysis of the right in the particular context of the case.”). | 2 | 3 |
Greg Myers, Etc. v. R. Kathleen Morris, Scott County Attorney, Etc.green2 sentences1998See Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (GAL in custody dispute); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987)(GAL in investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 , 1458 (6th Cir. 1984) (GAL in proceeding to terminate parental rights); Tindell v. Rogosheske, 428 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. 1988)(GAL in paternity and support action); Penn v. McMonagle, 573 N.E.2d 1234, 1237 (Ohio App. 1990)(GAL in child custody dispute). 1997See Scheib v. Grant, 22 F.3d 149 (7th Cir. 1994) (proceeding to prevent removal of child from state); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (divorce proceeding); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987) (investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 (6th Cir. 1984) (proceeding to terminate parental rights); Short v. Short, 730 F. Supp. 1037 (D. | 2 | 2 |
Dr. Gladys Cok v. Louis Cosentinogreen2 sentences1998See Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (GAL in custody dispute); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987)(GAL in investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 , 1458 (6th Cir. 1984) (GAL in proceeding to terminate parental rights); Tindell v. Rogosheske, 428 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. 1988)(GAL in paternity and support action); Penn v. McMonagle, 573 N.E.2d 1234, 1237 (Ohio App. 1990)(GAL in child custody dispute). 1997See Scheib v. Grant, 22 F.3d 149 (7th Cir. 1994) (proceeding to prevent removal of child from state); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (divorce proceeding); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987) (investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 (6th Cir. 1984) (proceeding to terminate parental rights); Short v. Short, 730 F. Supp. 1037 (D. | 1 | 2 |
Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Celotex Corporation and U.S. Mineral Products Company, Dana Corporationgreen1 sentence2002See Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Celotex Corp., 56 F.3d 343, 346 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Whether there is privity between a party against whom claim preclusion is asserted and a party to prior litigation is a functional inquiry in which the formalities of legal relationships provide clues but not solutions."). ¶ 19. | 1 | 1 |
Penn v. McMonaglegreen1 sentence1998See Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (GAL in custody dispute); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987)(GAL in investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 , 1458 (6th Cir. 1984) (GAL in proceeding to terminate parental rights); Tindell v. Rogosheske, 428 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. 1988)(GAL in paternity and support action); Penn v. McMonagle, 573 N.E.2d 1234, 1237 (Ohio App. 1990)(GAL in child custody dispute). | 1 | 1 |
Briscoe v. LaHuegreen1 sentence1998See, e.g., Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (witnesses injudicial proceedings); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978)(federal administrative law judge); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)(state prosecuting attorneys). 3 Employing the same functional analysis used by this court in Ford v. Kenosha County, 160 Wis. 2d 485 , 466 N.W.2d 646 (1991), a number of federal and state courts have held various participants in judicial proceedings, including guardians ad litem (GALs), absolutely immune from liability for the actions undertaken in performance of their roles as integral parts of the | 1 | 1 |
Forrester v. Whitegreen1 sentence1998Drawing from the reasoning of the United States Supreme Court, Wisconsin courts apply a functional analysis to determine whether such absolute immunity attaches to a particular defendant: "immunity is justified and defined by the functions it protects and serves, not by the person to whom it attaches." Ford, 160 Wis. 2d at 495 (quoting Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 227 (1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Scheib v. Grantgreen1 sentence1997See Scheib v. Grant, 22 F.3d 149 (7th Cir. 1994) (proceeding to prevent removal of child from state); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (divorce proceeding); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987) (investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 (6th Cir. 1984) (proceeding to terminate parental rights); Short v. Short, 730 F. Supp. 1037 (D. | 1 | 1 |
Ladish Malting Co. v. Wisconsin Department of Revenuegreen2 sentences1985We rejected the “physical appearance” test in favor of a functional analysis under which the central question is whether the structure is one “ ‘whose utility is principally and primarily a significantly contributive factor in the actual manufac *446 ture or production of the product itself.’ ” Id. at 506 , 297 N.W.2d at 60 (citation omitted). 1985We rejected the “physical appearance” test in favor of a functional analysis under which the central question is whether the structure is one “ ‘whose utility is principally and primarily a significantly contributive factor in the actual manufac *446 ture or production of the product itself.’ ” Id. at 506 , 297 N.W.2d at 60 (citation 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kurzawa v. Mueller
green
2 sentences1998See Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (GAL in custody dispute); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987)(GAL in investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 , 1458 (6th Cir. 1984) (GAL in proceeding to terminate parental rights); Tindell v. Rogosheske, 428 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. 1988)(GAL in paternity and support action); Penn v. McMonagle, 573 N.E.2d 1234, 1237 (Ohio App. 1990)(GAL in child custody dispute). 1997See Scheib v. Grant, 22 F.3d 149 (7th Cir. 1994) (proceeding to prevent removal of child from state); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (divorce proceeding); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987) (investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 (6th Cir. 1984) (proceeding to terminate parental rights); Short v. Short, 730 F. Supp. 1037 (D. | 2 | 1997–1998 |
Columbia International Corp. v. Kempler
green
2 sentences1994Thus, the supreme court applied what it termed "the functional test of intention," id. at 564 , 175 N.W.2d at 471 , and in so doing, evaluated the trial court's legal conclusion which was intertwined with its factual assessment of the Columbia — Kramer transaction. 1994Thus, the supreme court applied what it termed "the functional test of intention," id. at 564 , 175 N.W.2d at 471 , and in so doing, evaluated the trial court's legal conclusion which was intertwined with its factual assessment of the Columbia — Kramer transaction. | 2 | 1974–1994 |
Pasko v. City of Milwaukee
green
1 sentence2002On this issue, the court of appeals concluded that "[t]he officers and the MPA do not share the requisite 'absolute identity of interests.'" Pasko II, 2001 WI App 55, ¶ 10 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
In Re the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
green
2 sentences2000Judge Scalia read Seattle Times and Chief Justice Burger's observation in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. at 396 , that pretrial depositions and interrogatories are "wholly private to the litigants," as recognizing that the admission of evidence is the "touchstone" of a First Amendment right to public access. 773 F.2d at 1338 . 2000Judge Scalia read Seattle Times and Chief Justice Burger's observation in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. at 396 , that pretrial depositions and interrogatories are "wholly private to the litigants," as recognizing that the admission of evidence is the "touchstone" of a First Amendment right to public access. 773 F.2d at 1338 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Gannett Co. v. DePasquale
green
2 sentences2000Judge Scalia read Seattle Times and Chief Justice Burger's observation in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. at 396 , that pretrial depositions and interrogatories are "wholly private to the litigants," as recognizing that the admission of evidence is the "touchstone" of a First Amendment right to public access. 773 F.2d at 1338 . 2000Judge Scalia read Seattle Times and Chief Justice Burger's observation in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. at 396 , that pretrial depositions and interrogatories are "wholly private to the litigants," as recognizing that the admission of evidence is the "touchstone" of a First Amendment right to public access. 773 F.2d at 1338 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Imbler v. Pachtman
green
1 sentence1998See, e.g., Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (witnesses injudicial proceedings); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978)(federal administrative law judge); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)(state prosecuting attorneys). 3 Employing the same functional analysis used by this court in Ford v. Kenosha County, 160 Wis. 2d 485 , 466 N.W.2d 646 (1991), a number of federal and state courts have held various participants in judicial proceedings, including guardians ad litem (GALs), absolutely immune from liability for the actions undertaken in performance of their roles as integral parts of the | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Butz v. Economou
green
1 sentence1998See, e.g., Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (witnesses injudicial proceedings); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978)(federal administrative law judge); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)(state prosecuting attorneys). 3 Employing the same functional analysis used by this court in Ford v. Kenosha County, 160 Wis. 2d 485 , 466 N.W.2d 646 (1991), a number of federal and state courts have held various participants in judicial proceedings, including guardians ad litem (GALs), absolutely immune from liability for the actions undertaken in performance of their roles as integral parts of the | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Tindell v. Rogosheske
green
1 sentence1998See Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (GAL in custody dispute); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987)(GAL in investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 , 1458 (6th Cir. 1984) (GAL in proceeding to terminate parental rights); Tindell v. Rogosheske, 428 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. 1988)(GAL in paternity and support action); Penn v. McMonagle, 573 N.E.2d 1234, 1237 (Ohio App. 1990)(GAL in child custody dispute). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Ford v. Kenosha County
green
2 sentences1998Drawing from the reasoning of the United States Supreme Court, Wisconsin courts apply a functional analysis to determine whether such absolute immunity attaches to a particular defendant: "immunity is justified and defined by the functions it protects and serves, not by the person to whom it attaches." Ford, 160 Wis. 2d at 495 (quoting Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 227 (1988)). 1998See, e.g., Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (witnesses injudicial proceedings); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978)(federal administrative law judge); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)(state prosecuting attorneys). 3 Employing the same functional analysis used by this court in Ford v. Kenosha County, 160 Wis. 2d 485 , 466 N.W.2d 646 (1991), a number of federal and state courts have held various participants in judicial proceedings, including guardians ad litem (GALs), absolutely immune from liability for the actions undertaken in performance of their roles as integral parts of the | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Short by Oosterhous v. Short
green
1 sentence1997See Scheib v. Grant, 22 F.3d 149 (7th Cir. 1994) (proceeding to prevent removal of child from state); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989) (divorce proceeding); Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1465-67 (8th Cir. 1987) (investigation of child sexual abuse); Kurzawa v. Mueller, 732 F.2d 1456 (6th Cir. 1984) (proceeding to terminate parental rights); Short v. Short, 730 F. Supp. 1037 (D. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Loveladies Property Owners Ass'n, Inc. v. BARNEGAT CITY, ETC., CO.
green
1 sentence1977Loveladies, supra , expressly holds that the distinction between *Page 7 streets and lots applies to private as well as public streets. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.