The Supreme Court’s 2018-19 Term: Some Initial Impressions

With the last substantive decisions now filed for the 2018-19 term, we can begin a series of posts that examine various aspects of the justices’ labors over the past 12 months.[Continue Reading…]

Fantasy League Update

This week’s decisions delivered five points to the Citations for a brief and oral argument by Tracey Wood & Associates in State v. Jessica M. Randall, thereby moving the Citations into a tie with the Writs for second place.

Click here for the complete, updated standings.

Fantasy League Update

For months, fans of the Writs have been waiting for the preseason acquisition of the Wisconsin Institute For Law & Liberty (WILL) to justify the steep price (two law firms from the team’s 2017-18 roster), and this week that trade finally bore fruit. The Writs jumped all the way into second place with 16 points from Kristi Koschkee v. Carolyn Stanford Taylor  (10 points from WILL for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome; and six points from Pines Bach for a brief and oral argument, and an amicus brief).

The Affirmed was the only other team to join the scoring, with a point from Stafford Rosenbaum for an amicus oral argument in the same case.

Click here for the complete, updated standings.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Statistics, 1974-75

These tables are derived from information contained in 304 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1974, and August 31, 1975.  The total of 304 decisions does not include rulings arising from (1) disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges, and (2) short orders, with no author identified, pertaining to petitions, motions, and various other actions.  

The tables are available as a complete set and by individual topic in the subsets listed below.

Four-to-Three Decisions
Decisions Arranged by Vote Split
Frequency of Justices in the Majority
Distribution of Opinion Authorship
Frequency of Agreement Between Pairs of Justices
Average Time Between Oral Argument and Opinions Authored by Each Justice
Number of Oral Arguments Presented by Individual Firms and Agencies

Fantasy League Update

Three teams made gains this week, led by the Waivers (10 points from Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Rural Mutual Insurance Company v. Lester Buildings, LLC and one point from Boardman & Clark for an amicus brief in League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Tony Evers). With this haul, the Waivers moved ahead of the idle Citations into second place.

Meanwhile, the Writs tallied five points (from Pines Bach for a brief and oral argument in League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Tony Evers), as did the Affirmed (from Stafford Rosenbaum, also for a brief and oral argument in League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Tony Evers).

Click here for the complete, updated standings.

Fantasy League Update

With this week’s decisions from the supreme court, the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office stunned the rest of the league by adding 21 points to their total: six points for a brief, oral argument, and 3-3 decision in Raytrell K. Fitzgerald v. Circuit Court for Milwaukee County; ten points for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in State v. Raytrell K. Fitzgerald; and five points for a brief and oral argument in Waukesha County v. S.L.L.

However, I have been given to understand (unofficially) that there are not likely to be any more public-defender decisions this term, thereby providing the rest of the league an opportunity to reel the Gavels back in during the season’s closing weeks. One team to watch in this regard is the Waivers, who gained a point for an amicus brief by Quarles & Brady in State v. Raytrell K. Fitzgerald.

Click here for the updated, current standings.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Statistics, 1975-1976

These tables are derived from information contained in 289 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1975, and August 31, 1976.  The total of 289 decisions does not include rulings arising from (1) disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges, and (2) per curiam decisions involving various motions and petitions.

Security Sav. & Loan Asso. v. Wauwatosa Colony, Inc. yielded a fragmented decision. Thus, I will only include this case in the following tables: “Distribution of Opinion Authorship,” “Average Time Between Oral Argument and Opinions Authored by Each Justice,” and “Number of Oral Arguments Presented by Individual Firms and Agencies.”

The tables are available as a complete set and by individual topic in the subsets listed below.

Four-to-Three Decisions
Decisions Arranged by Vote Split
Frequency of Justices in the Majority
Distribution of Opinion Authorship
Frequency of Agreement Between Pairs of Justices
Average Time Between Oral Argument and Opinions Authored by Each Justice
Number of Oral Arguments Presented by Individual Firms and Agencies

 

Fantasy League Update

In this week’s batch of decisions, Habush Habush & Rottier delivered seven points to the Writs (for a brief, oral argument, and partially-favorable ruling in David W. Paynter v. ProAssurance Wisconsin Insurance Company)—moving them ahead of the Affirmed into fourth place.

Click here for the updated, current standings.

Crowd-Source Reminder

This is a monthly reminder to readers to “nominate” Wisconsin Supreme Court cases from the 2018-19 term that contain surprising aspects.  As I did last year, I will maintain a collection of cases and comments submitted and post them at the end of the summer. (Click here to see the results for 2017-18.)

“Surprising aspects” could include (1) decisions featuring odd combinations of justices dissenting or in the majority; (2) arguments in a majority or separate opinion that one might not expect from the author in question; (3) an unusual source in a footnote; (4) a popular-culture reference out of the blue; (5) a humorous passage; (6) a case in which a husband and wife delivered oral arguments on opposing sides; (7) something else unusual about the law firms involved—in short, pretty much anything unexpected.

Please email me your nominations (alan.ball@marquette.edu), as many as you wish, confident in the assurance that I will not reveal the names of nominators or their firms when I display our harvest at the end of the summer.  Please also include a brief explanation (just a sentence or two would likely be sufficient) indicating the case’s curious feature.  I hope that we can gather enough to yield an interesting array.

Fantasy League Update

After this week’s flurry of decisions, the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office are still clinging to their perch at the top of the standing, thanks to five points for a brief and oral argument in State v. Javien Cajujuan Pegeese and one point for an amicus brief in State v. Emmanuel Earl Trammell. However, the second-place Citations crept even closer on the strength of a 10-point performance by the Frank J. Remington Center (brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Ezequiel Lopez-Quintero v. Michael A. Dittmann). Meanwhile, the Waivers maintained their hold on third place with two points from Henak Law Office (amicus briefs in Ezequiel Lopez-Quintero v. Michael A. Dittmann and State v. Emmanuel Earl Trammell). Farther down the standings, the Affirmed climbed past the idle Writs when Conway, Olejniczak & Jerry delivered five points for a brief and oral argument in Leicht Transfer & Storage Company v. Pallet Central Enterprises.

Click here for the complete, updated standings.