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 2002–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Village Food & Liquor Mart v. H & S Petroleum, Inc.green2 sentences2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b 2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b | 4 | 6 |
State v. Schwedagreen2 sentences2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b 2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b | 3 | 3 |
Dane County v. McGrewgreen2 sentences2009The majority expresses dissatisfaction with the Village Food test and highlights the court's split decisions when applying the test: "Although this court has been unani *44 mous in concluding that the Village Food test is the correct test to apply,... the application of the test to particular causes of action has not occasioned similar consensus." See majority op., ¶ 64 (quoting State v. Schweda, 2007 WI 100, ¶ 21 , 303 Wis. 2d 353 , 736 N.W.2d 49 ); see also Dane County v. McGrew, 2005 WI 130 , 285 Wis. 2d 519 , 699 N.W.2d 890 ; Village Food, 254 Wis. 2d 478 . ¶ 105. 2009The majority expresses dissatisfaction with the Village Food test and highlights the court's split decisions when applying the test: "Although this court has been unani *44 mous in concluding that the Village Food test is the correct test to apply,... the application of the test to particular causes of action has not occasioned similar consensus." See majority op., ¶ 64 (quoting State v. Schweda, 2007 WI 100, ¶ 21 , 303 Wis. 2d 353 , 736 N.W.2d 49 ); see also Dane County v. McGrew, 2005 WI 130 , 285 Wis. 2d 519 , 699 N.W.2d 890 ; Village Food, 254 Wis. 2d 478 . ¶ 105. | 1 | 2 |
Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n. v. Citation Homesgreen2 sentences2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b 2014Instead, stating his contention in this fashion implies that it is sufficient to note that "[a] negligence action for damages is an action at law and is encompassed by the constitutional jury guaranty." Windsor Square Homeowners Ass'n v. Citation Homes, 62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 818, 820 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).5 Adopting Adams' contention, which is unaccompanied by analysis, would "render the Village Food test a nullity because 'present causes of action of all sorts assessed under this test will . . . have to be compared [only] generally . . . in order to invoke the constitutional protection to a trial b | 1 | 1 |
Bergren v. Staplesgreen1 sentence2002See Bergren, 263 Wis. at 483 .1 would affirm the ruling of the circuit court, and find that it properly granted Village Food's motion to strike H & S's demand for a jury trial in this case. ¶ 49. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mueller v. Brunn
green
2 sentences2014Mueller v. Brunn, 105 Wis. 2d 171, 180 , 313 N.W.2d 790 (1982) (explaining that "[t]respass on the case is the ancestor of the present day action for negligence where problems of legal and factual cause arise."). 2014Mueller v. Brunn, 105 Wis. 2d 171, 180 , 313 N.W.2d 790 (1982) (explaining that "[t]respass on the case is the ancestor of the present day action for negligence where problems of legal and factual cause arise."). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Harvot v. Solo Cup Co.
green
2 sentences2011In applying the first step of the Village Food test, we look to whether a § 74.37 de novo action "is essentially the counterpart of a cause of action existing in 1848 [and whether] the two causes of action. . . share a similar purpose." Harvot v. Solo Cup Co., 2009 WI 85, ¶ 72 , 320 Wis. 2d 1 , 768 N.W.2d 176 . ¶ 51. 2011In applying the first step of the Village Food test, we look to whether a § 74.37 de novo action "is essentially the counterpart of a cause of action existing in 1848 [and whether] the two causes of action. . . share a similar purpose." Harvot v. Solo Cup Co., 2009 WI 85, ¶ 72 , 320 Wis. 2d 1 , 768 N.W.2d 176 . ¶ 51. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Hutchinson v. McClellan
green
2 sentences2005Unlike the dissent, I do not interpret the case of Norval v. Rice, 2 Wis. 17 ,[*22] (1853) as altering this analysis or conclusion. 2005Unlike the dissent, I do not interpret the case of Norval v. Rice, 2 Wis. 17 ,[*22] (1853) as altering this analysis or conclusion. | 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.