Appellate Decisions Released June 13, 2006
The Wisconsin Supreme Court released the following opinions today:
Borst v. Allstate Ins. Co. The Court held that (1) arbitrators enjoy a rebuttable presumption of impartiality, (2) evident partiality cannot be vitiated by full disclosure, and (3) arbitrators lack inherent authority to determine the scope of discovery.
Robin K. v. Lamanda K. When a parent objects to a guardianship petition, the court may appoint a nonparent as guardian when there are extraordinary circumstances affecting the health or safety of the minor child.
Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank. The Court held that to state a breach of contract claim as a third-party beneficiary, the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to show the contract was created primarily and directly for plaintiff's benefit. It also held that when attempting to plead a claim of lender liability based on the lender's failure to take certain precautionary measures, the plaintiff must alleged why those measures are required by the duty of ordinary care.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals released these opinions today, recommending the following for publication:
McDonald v. McDonald. A mortgage under seal is conclusive proof of consideration for both the mortgage and the underlying note it secures.
State v. Odom (sentencing).
Schreiner v. Up North Plastics, Inc. (evidence demonstrating causative link between conduct and injury is essential to avoid summary judgment).
Peterson v. Cornerstone Property Development, LLC. The Court held that a contract's "integration clause" can bar section 100.18 claims as long as it explicitly states that the contract's language supersedes all prior representations.
Borst v. Allstate Ins. Co. The Court held that (1) arbitrators enjoy a rebuttable presumption of impartiality, (2) evident partiality cannot be vitiated by full disclosure, and (3) arbitrators lack inherent authority to determine the scope of discovery.
Robin K. v. Lamanda K. When a parent objects to a guardianship petition, the court may appoint a nonparent as guardian when there are extraordinary circumstances affecting the health or safety of the minor child.
Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank. The Court held that to state a breach of contract claim as a third-party beneficiary, the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to show the contract was created primarily and directly for plaintiff's benefit. It also held that when attempting to plead a claim of lender liability based on the lender's failure to take certain precautionary measures, the plaintiff must alleged why those measures are required by the duty of ordinary care.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals released these opinions today, recommending the following for publication:
McDonald v. McDonald. A mortgage under seal is conclusive proof of consideration for both the mortgage and the underlying note it secures.
State v. Odom (sentencing).
Schreiner v. Up North Plastics, Inc. (evidence demonstrating causative link between conduct and injury is essential to avoid summary judgment).
Peterson v. Cornerstone Property Development, LLC. The Court held that a contract's "integration clause" can bar section 100.18 claims as long as it explicitly states that the contract's language supersedes all prior representations.
posted by Daniel Kelly at 6:33 PM
<< Home