Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Wisconsin opinions name it 3 courts 1986–2026 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Fenclgreen2 sentences1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather 1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Certain Land in City of Augusta, Maine
green
1 sentence2026Id. at 697-98 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences2025Second, he argues that the court’s ruling on the other acts evidence during the trial was also erroneous because even though the court addressed the framework required by State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis. 2d 768 , 576 N.W.2d 30 (1998), its reasoning was just another way of saying the evidence could be used to prove propensity. 2025Second, he argues that the court’s ruling on the other acts evidence during the trial was also erroneous because even though the court addressed the framework required by State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis. 2d 768 , 576 N.W.2d 30 (1998), its reasoning was just another way of saying the evidence could be used to prove propensity. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Gudgeon
green
2 sentences2019Further, nothing in the transcript of the extension hearing would dispel these concerns." Id. , ¶26. ¶23 Similarly, in Goodson , this court addressed a claim of a due process violation based on an allegedly impartial judge. 2019Id. , 320 Wis. 2d 166 , ¶1. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Goodson
green
1 sentence2019Id. , 320 Wis. 2d 166 , ¶1. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Stores v. Labor & Industry Review Commission
green
2 sentences2007In Crystal Lake, this court, relying in part on the court of appeals' decision in Target Stores v. LIRC, 217 Wis. 2d 1, 13-14 , 576 N.W.2d 545 (Ct. App. 1998), concluded that LIRC's interpretation and application of reasonable accommodation was entitled to great weight deference. 2007In Crystal Lake, this court, relying in part on the court of appeals' decision in Target Stores v. LIRC, 217 Wis. 2d 1, 13-14 , 576 N.W.2d 545 (Ct. App. 1998), concluded that LIRC's interpretation and application of reasonable accommodation was entitled to great weight deference. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Hutchinson Technology, Inc. v. Labor & Industry Review Commission
green
2 sentences2007This court addressed the standard of review generally applicable to reasonable accommodation determinations in Crystal Lake Cheese Factory v. LIRC, 2003 WI 106 , 264 Wis. 2d 200 , 664 N.W.2d 651 , and Hutchinson Technology, Inc. v. LIRC, 2004 WI 90 , 273 Wis. 2d 394 , 682 N.W.2d 343 . 2007This court addressed the standard of review generally applicable to reasonable accommodation determinations in Crystal Lake Cheese Factory v. LIRC, 2003 WI 106 , 264 Wis. 2d 200 , 664 N.W.2d 651 , and Hutchinson Technology, Inc. v. LIRC, 2004 WI 90 , 273 Wis. 2d 394 , 682 N.W.2d 343 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Crystal Lake Cheese Factory v. Labor & Industry Review Commission
green
2 sentences2007This court addressed the standard of review generally applicable to reasonable accommodation determinations in Crystal Lake Cheese Factory v. LIRC, 2003 WI 106 , 264 Wis. 2d 200 , 664 N.W.2d 651 , and Hutchinson Technology, Inc. v. LIRC, 2004 WI 90 , 273 Wis. 2d 394 , 682 N.W.2d 343 . 2007This court addressed the standard of review generally applicable to reasonable accommodation determinations in Crystal Lake Cheese Factory v. LIRC, 2003 WI 106 , 264 Wis. 2d 200 , 664 N.W.2d 651 , and Hutchinson Technology, Inc. v. LIRC, 2004 WI 90 , 273 Wis. 2d 394 , 682 N.W.2d 343 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Lange v. Town of Norway
green
2 sentences2005Id. at 317 n. 3. 2005Id. at 317 n.3. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Matter of Application for Admission to Bar of Childs
green
2 sentences1999In support of that contention, Mr. Radtke relied on the court's decision in Application of Childs, 101 Wis. 2d 159 , 303 N.W.2d 663 (1981), in *267 which the court addressed a bar admission applicant's due process right in the bar admission process. ¶ 28. 1999In support of that contention, Mr. Radtke relied on the court's decision in Application of Childs, 101 Wis. 2d 159 , 303 N.W.2d 663 (1981), in *267 which the court addressed a bar admission applicant's due process right in the bar admission process. ¶ 28. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Rudolph v. State
green
2 sentences1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather 1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather | 1 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Kircher
green
2 sentences1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather 1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Odell v. State
green
2 sentences1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather 1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Ternes v. North Dakota
green
2 sentences1996J. 91 (1995). [4] See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitut 1996See State v. Fencl, 109 Wis. 2d 224, 232-240 , 325 N.W.2d 703 (1982) (defendant's trial counsel did not object to state's references at trial to the defendant's prearrest silence; because the court addressed the claim raised on appeal under the Fifth rather than the Sixth Amendment, the state was required to carry the burden of persuasion demonstrating that the error was harmless); Rudolph v. State, 78 Wis. 2d 435, 441-43 , 254 N.W.2d 471 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 944 (state's reference at trial to defendant's election to remain silent raised as Fifth Amendment constitutional error rather | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Doe Ex Rel. Doe v. Aldine Independent School District
green
1 sentence1986Applying the three-part Lemon test, the Court addressed the claim made by the school that the prayer had the secular purpose of instilling in the students "`a sense of school spirit or pride . . . *Page 85 [which] has a beneficial effect on the student body and contributes to an increase in morale, and concomitantly lessens disciplinary problems.'" Aldine , 563 F. Supp. at 886 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.