Wisconsin Supreme Court
No Voter ID Needed to Vote in Recall Elections
Submitted by Hamilton on Thu, 04/26/2012 - 12:59pmThe Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to the state’s new voter ID law. This means there is not enough time for the cases to be resolved before the May 8 primary and June 5 recall elections, so the injunctions barring implementation of the law will remain in place.
Split Opinion Clouds Physician Liability Law
Submitted by Hamilton on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 10:49amThe Wisconsin Supreme Court, on April 17, issued a split decision greatly expanding the liability of physicians in medical liability cases. The case involved the scope of a physician's duty to inform a patient, often referred to as "informed consent."
Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules that Default Judgment Was Void Due to Plaintiff’s Failure to Name Proper Corporate Defendant
Submitted by Hamilton on Tue, 04/03/2012 - 6:48pmThe Wisconsin Supreme Court has issued its decision in Johnson v. Cintas Corp. No. 2, et al., 2012 WI 31, which is the latest in a number of recent cases accepted by the Court dealing with default judgments. (Oral arguments can be viewed on WisconsinEye.)
Wisconisn Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Case Deciding Default Judgments
Submitted by Hamilton on Thu, 12/08/2011 - 8:49amThe Wisconsin Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Johnson v. Cintas Corp. No. 2, et al., 2011 WI App 5, 2009AP2549, which is the latest in a number of recent cases accepted by the Court dealing with default judgments.
The issue is whether a default judgment is void because the summons and complaint names the wrong corporate defendant and thus personal jurisdiction is not obtained over the correct corporate entity.
Wisconsin Supreme Court Limits Personal Jurisdiction over Foreign Corporations
Submitted by Hamilton on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:00pm
The Wisconsin Supreme Court today issued a decision today, Rasmussen v. General Motors et al., 2011 WI 52, which places limits on lawsuits filed against foreign corporations in Wisconsin. Although the case caption cites General Motors, the specific issue in this case was whether Wisconsin had personal jurisdiction over Nissan Japan.
The lawsuit involved a class action case against numerous auto manufacturers for alleged anti-trust violations. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Nissan Japan and its wholly owned subsidiary, Nissan North America, conspired to keep new car prices at significantly higher prices than prices in Canada for same vehicles. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants arranged for U.S. dealers to not honor warranties on cars imported from Canada to prevent lower prices cars from being imported to the U.S.
