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 2 courts 1997–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Appleton Post-Crescent v. Janssengreen2 sentences2000See also Appleton Post-Crescent v. Janssen, 149 Wis. 2d 294, 301 , 441 N.W.2d 255 (Ct. App. 1989) (LRB analysis indicative of legislative intent). ¶ 23. 2000See also Appleton Post-Crescent v. Janssen, 149 Wis. 2d 294, 301 , 441 N.W.2d 255 (Ct. App. 1989) (LRB analysis indicative of legislative intent). ¶ 23. | 2 | 2 |
Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doylegreen2 sentences2012The LRB analysis stated that the CPCN law "establishes a method whereby the development of major electric generating and transmission facilities in this state is subject to scrutiny by the public ... and to approval by [the PSC and the DNR]." (Emphasis in Interim Order.) The PSC found this helpful because the LRB's analysis was " 'printed with and displayed on the bill when it [was] introduced in the legislature,'" quoting Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doyle, 2006 WI 107, ¶ 32 , 295 Wis. 2d 1 , 719 N.W.2d 408 . ¶ 10. 2012The LRB analysis stated that the CPCN law "establishes a method whereby the development of major electric generating and transmission facilities in this state is subject to scrutiny by the public ... and to approval by [the PSC and the DNR]." (Emphasis in Interim Order.) The PSC found this helpful because the LRB's analysis was " 'printed with and displayed on the bill when it [was] introduced in the legislature,'" quoting Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doyle, 2006 WI 107, ¶ 32 , 295 Wis. 2d 1 , 719 N.W.2d 408 . ¶ 10. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2014See State v. Williams, 2013 WI App 74 , ¶ 32 n.4, 350 Wis. 2d 311 , 833 N.W.2d 846 (Blanchard, J., dissenting). 2014See State v. Williams, 2013 WI App 74 , ¶ 32 n.4, 350 Wis. 2d 311 , 833 N.W.2d 846 (Blanchard, J., dissenting). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Colegreen1 sentence2005See Cole, 264 Wis. 2d 520 , ¶ 36 n.12; State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227, ¶ 72 , 248 Wis. 2d 409 , 636 N.W.2d 488 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burbank Grease Services, LLC v. Sokolowski
green
2 sentences2006Burbank Grease, 278 Wis.2d 698, ¶ 45 , 693 N.W.2d 89 . 2006Burbank Grease, 278 Wis.2d 698, ¶ 45 , 693 N.W.2d 89 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Schilling v. State Crime Victims Rights Board
green
2 sentences2006Schilling, 278 Wis.2d 216 , ¶ 25 n. 9, 692 N.W.2d 623 . 2006Schilling, 278 Wis. 2d 216 , ¶ 25 n.9. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Gribble
green
2 sentences2005See Cole, 264 Wis. 2d 520 , ¶ 36 n.12; State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227, ¶ 72 , 248 Wis. 2d 409 , 636 N.W.2d 488 . 2005See Cole, 264 Wis. 2d 520 , ¶ 36 n.12; State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227, ¶ 72 , 248 Wis. 2d 409 , 636 N.W.2d 488 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |