Appellate Decisions Released April 27, 2006
The Wisconsin Supreme Court did not release any opinions or dispositional orders today.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals released these opinions today, of which it recommended publication of the following:
Jackson v. LIRC. The Circuit Court, sua sponte, dismissed Mr. Jackson's petition for review of his LIRC complaint for failure to "state the nature of his interest, facts showing he was aggrieved, and the grounds on which the agency decision should be reversed or modified" as required by statute. The Court of Appeals decided such a dismissal may only follow respondent's request for such relief. Additionally, the Court said that if the request for dismissal is predicated on the "failure to state facts showing the petitioner was aggrieved," the petitioner must have "at least one opportunity to amend" the pleading to conform to the statutory requirements. If, instead, the ground for requesting dismissal is the "failure to state the nature of petitioner's interest and the grounds on which the agency's decision should be reversed or modified," then the petitioner must first have "a reasonable opportunity to request leave to amend the petition."
State v. Haase. Mr. Haase was convicted of two counts of first-degree reckless endangering safety and one count each of eluding an officer, resisting arrest, and jumping bail. In the course of apprehending Mr. Haase during these events, an officer drove his squad car into a farm field, jumped out, and pursued Mr. Haase into a barn. Meanwhile, the squad car "burst into flames" and was destroyed. As part of Mr. Haase's sentence, the Circuit Court ordered Mr. Haase to make restitution to Dane County in the amount of the squad car's (pre-fire) value. The Court concluded the fire was not a direct result of Mr. Haase's criminal conduct, and so reversed the restitution order as it related to the cost of the car.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals released these opinions today, of which it recommended publication of the following:
Jackson v. LIRC. The Circuit Court, sua sponte, dismissed Mr. Jackson's petition for review of his LIRC complaint for failure to "state the nature of his interest, facts showing he was aggrieved, and the grounds on which the agency decision should be reversed or modified" as required by statute. The Court of Appeals decided such a dismissal may only follow respondent's request for such relief. Additionally, the Court said that if the request for dismissal is predicated on the "failure to state facts showing the petitioner was aggrieved," the petitioner must have "at least one opportunity to amend" the pleading to conform to the statutory requirements. If, instead, the ground for requesting dismissal is the "failure to state the nature of petitioner's interest and the grounds on which the agency's decision should be reversed or modified," then the petitioner must first have "a reasonable opportunity to request leave to amend the petition."
State v. Haase. Mr. Haase was convicted of two counts of first-degree reckless endangering safety and one count each of eluding an officer, resisting arrest, and jumping bail. In the course of apprehending Mr. Haase during these events, an officer drove his squad car into a farm field, jumped out, and pursued Mr. Haase into a barn. Meanwhile, the squad car "burst into flames" and was destroyed. As part of Mr. Haase's sentence, the Circuit Court ordered Mr. Haase to make restitution to Dane County in the amount of the squad car's (pre-fire) value. The Court concluded the fire was not a direct result of Mr. Haase's criminal conduct, and so reversed the restitution order as it related to the cost of the car.
posted by Daniel Kelly at 8:41 AM
<< Home