Appellate

RSS Link

June 17, 2025 – An expert witness answering a juror’s question about the frequency of false reports of child sexual abuse remains permissible testimony, a unanimous Wisconsin Supreme Court decided Friday in State v. Molde, 2025 WI 21.

The conclusion reverses precedent binding on the court of appeals from State v. Mader, 2023 WI App 35, that applied the prohibition against vouching for witness credibility in State v. Hazeltine, 120 Wis. 2d 92 (Ct. App. 1984).

“We…
Continue Reading Supreme Court: Expert Statistics Not Witness Vouching

June 16, 2025 – A 6-1 Wisconsin Supreme Court majority in State v. Grady, 2025 WI 22 recently agreed that Waukesha County Circuit Court did not deprive the defendant of due process when it alerted the defendant, appearing by Zoom, that the courtroom would hear his conversation with his lawyer.

“We defer to the circuit court’s factual finding that [Kordell L.] Grady did not intend for his conversation with his counsel during the restitution hearing to be confidential…
Continue Reading Supreme Court: Warning Sufficient That Client Wasn't Speaking Confidentially

June 11, 2025 – No specific burden of proof applies when a circuit court decides whether termination of parental rights (TPR) is in the best interest of the child, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided recently in

State v. H.C., 2025 WI 20. In unanimously affirming the TPR against H.C., the majority opinion written by Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley explained, “we hold the best interests of the child governing the dispositional phase of a TPR proceeding constitutes a discretionary…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court: No Burden of Proof at TPR Disposition

On June 5th, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion that reversed the Wisconsin Supreme Court to find that the state court had violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment by explicitly imposing “a denominational preference by differentiating between religions based on theological lines.” By distinguishing between religious bodies that engage in proselytizing with their charitable activities and the Catholic Church that does not engage in proselytizing with its charitable activities, an illegal distinction had been made…
Continue Reading Catholic Charities: Religious exemption found

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in the case of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, that “the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group.”

In the underlying case, the plaintiff (Marlean Ames) claimed that she was denied a promotion, and subsequently demoted from her then-current position at the Ohio Department of Youth Services (with a significant drop in…
Continue Reading Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier for Employees to Prove ‘Reverse Discrimination’

June 4, 2025 – A 5-2 majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided Friday in

Hubbard v. Neuman, 2025 WI 15, that a patient’s informed consent complaint against her doctor could proceed even though the doctor didn’t participate in the surgery that resulted in the patient’​s ovaries being removed. “Taking [Melissa] Hubbard’s allegations as true and drawing all reasonable inferences from a required liberal construction of those allegations, we determine Dr. Neuman failed to show that under no…
Continue Reading Supreme Court: Doctor Potentially Liable Even if Not Physically Present

https-www-wisbar-org-newspublications-publishingimages-article%20images-appeals-court-building-1200x630-jpg

In its recent decision in Texas v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (the “Court”) held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) cannot require employers to provide accommodations for transgender employees when it comes to bathroom access, dress codes and the use of pronouns, and that Title VII’s definition of “sex” does not apply to sexual orientation and gender identity.
Background
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964…
Continue Reading Federal Judge Vacates EEOC Guidelines on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

https-www-wisbar-org-newspublications-publishingimages-article%20images-gavel-desk-scales-court-1200x630-jpg

State v. Donaven C. Sprague, 2022AP876-CR, 5/20/25, District III (not recommended for publication), case activity

In the second defense win this week on appeal from a Barron County conviction (see Wooldridge), the COA vacated Donaven Sprague’s sentence to 10 years of initial confinement for repeated sexual assault of a child because the State breached its plea agreement to recommend no more than 5 years of initial confinement and did not cure the breach.  The Court also found…
Continue Reading Defense Win: COA orders resentencing before a different judge

Sheboygan County v. N.A.L., 2024AP1195, petition for review of an unpublished decision of the court of appeals, granted 5/122/25; case activity

In yet another interesting Chapter 51 appeal, SCOW signals its willingness to resolve whether a colloquy is required before accepting a stipulation to an involuntary mental commitment order (and accompanying involuntary med order)–an issue which has recurred since 2005.

As it has continued to do in other recent cases, SCOW accepts only one of the issues…
Continue Reading SCOW accepts review in Chapter 51 appeal

May 19, 2025 – A Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permit did not need to require supplementary battery storage for a new natural gas-fired electric generating plant, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals decided Thursday in
Sierra Club v. DNR, No. 2024AP673 (May 15, 2025). The court remanded the permit to DNR because part of the permit’s basis comes from the agency’s Background Concentration Protocol, which the court held was an unpromulgated rule – created outside the required…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: Gas-Fired Power Plant Rule Requires Remand

https-www-wisbar-org-newspublications-publishingimages-article%20images-appeals-court-building-1200x630-jpg

On April 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (the “Seventh Circuit” or “Court”) affirmed summary judgment in Partin v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., Inc., applying the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework to Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”) retaliation claims.
Case Background
Plaintiff Dr. William Partin (“Partin”) was an employee of Floyd Associates (“Floyd”), a medical staffing company with whom Baptist Healthcare System, Inc. (“Baptist”) contracted for emergency department medical personnel. Partin resigned…
Continue Reading Emergency Physician Loses Appeal on EMTALA Retaliation Claim

May 13, 2025 – Three victims of a violent 2015 hostage-taking in Neenah recently lost their Fourth Amendment claims before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Moderson v. City of Neenah, No. 23-2843 (May 9, 2025).

In a decision written by Circuit Judge Candace Jackson-Akiwumi and joined by Judges Frank H. Easterbrook and Ilana Diamond Rovner, the dangerous crime scene made brief seizures reasonable even when two victims were handcuffed…
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals: Rough Handling Not Wrongful Seizure

https-www-wisbar-org-newspublications-publishingimages-article%20images-wisconsin-supreme-court-1200x630-jpg

State v. Bernabe Gonzalez,  2024AP358-CR, 5/6/25, District I (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

In what we believe is COA’s first foray into the vexing world of firearm regulation post-Bruen and Rahimi, COA holds that a Wisconsin’s statute prohibiting intoxicated persons from “going armed” passes muster under an originalist legal analysis.

Faithful readers will recall that this issue previously reached SCOW in 2021, resulting in a 5-1-1 decision (with Justice Hagedorn concurring and Justice R.G. Bradley…
Continue Reading COA Holds That Statute Prohibiting Possession of a Firearm While Intoxicated Passes Muster

The ongoing battle over Missouri’s paid sick time law and significant increase in minimum wage, known as Proposition A, continues. On Tuesday, April 29, 2025, the Missouri Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding Proposition A in the case of Raymond McCarty, et al. v. Missouri Secretary of State, et al. Consequently, without legislation to repeal the paid sick time mandate, Proposition A went into full effect for most Missouri employers on May 1, 2025. Accordingly, Missouri employers must ensure…
Continue Reading Missouri Supreme Court Upholds State’s Paid Sick Leave Law (Proposition A)

May 2, 2025 – The partial veto power extends to allow Gov. Tony Evers to change a biennial budget provision to last 402 years, a 4-3 majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently held in LeMieux v. Evers, 2025 WI 12.

The dissent found this partial veto problem greater than the acts of the current governor – 49 years of supreme court decisions strayed from the constitution, necessitating correction.

Revenue Increase Through 2425

In the 2023-25 biennial budget,…
Continue Reading Constitution Allows Partial Veto Fixing Biennial Budget Increase for 402 Years

The Wisconsin governor’s partial-veto power is unique. Although some states grant governors the power to veto entire budget line items, Wisconsin’s governor may veto discrete parts of appropriation bills, including words, punctuation marks, and digits. See generally Wis. Const. art. V, § 10(1)(b), (c). On April 18, 2025, the Wisconsin Supreme Court revisited Wisconsin’s anomalous partial veto power in its tenth ever opinion on the topic, LeMieux v. Evers, 2025 WI 12, which addressed the constitutionality of Governor Tony…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Governor’s ‘400-Year Veto’ and Affirms Expansive Partial-Veto Power