In Robles v. Thomas Hribar Truck & Equipment, Inc. (2019AP1412), the Court reversed the circuit court’s reversal of an LIRC decision finding that Robles was fired for unprofessional conduct, and not because of discrimination.
Author: Hamilton
Buehrens v. Schave (Restrictive Covenants)
In Buehrens v. Schave (2019AP1649), the Court affirmed the circuit court’s finding that the term “garage” as it was used in a residential restrictive covenant was ambiguous, and therefore couldn’t be used to restrict the free and unencumbered use of property.
Arrowhead Systems Inc. v. Grant Thornton LLP (Breach of Contract)
In Arrowhead Systems Inc. v. Grant Thornton LLP (2019AP2268), the Court affirmed summary judgement for accounting firm Grant Thornton who were being sued by Arrowhead for negligence, breach of duty, and breach of contract because Grant Thornton did not alert Arrowhead to a specific strategy that could have saved him money.
Jones Sign Co. v. Consensus Consulting & Construction, Inc. (Forum Selection Clause)
In Jones Sign Co. v. Consensus Consulting & Construction, Inc. (2019AP002189), the Court of Appeals gave a per curiam opinion which upheld a forum selection clause in a contract.
Loren Imhoff Homebuilder, Inc. v. Taylor
In Loren Imhoff Homebuilder, Inc. v. Taylor (2019AP002205), an arbitrator fell asleep during an evidentiary hearing so the circuit court vacated his final decision, the court of appeals reversed.
Ebert v. Village of Gresham (Statutory Notice Requirement)
In Ebert v. Village of Gresham (2019AP002178), the Court affirmed a circuit court dismissal of a trespass claim that failed to timely comply with the a notice of claim statute.
Nelson v. Loessin (Involuntary Plaintiffs)
In Nelson v. Loessin (2018AP002448), the Court reversed the circuit court’s decision to deny involuntary plaintiff’s dismissal motion.
Rural Mutual Insurance Co. v. Kuhn North American, Inc. (Failure to Meet Ordered Deadline)
In Rural Mutual Insurance Co. v. Kuhn North American, Inc. (2019AP001907), the Court affirmed a decision of summary judgement against Rural after they had failed to meet the deadline for disclosing lay witnesses.
COVID-19 Premises Liability Legislation Circulating in Wisconsin Legislature
Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield), Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam), and Rep. Dan Knodl (R-Germantown) are circulating legislation to shield Wisconsin businesses, schools, universities, and other entities from the threat of lawsuits alleging liability for COVID-19 exposures. Such protections would only apply to those who take adequate precautions to keep their premises safe.
On September 9, a broad coalition of over 60 groups, including the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses – Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, the Wisconsin Builders Association, the Wisconsin Restaurant Association, the Midwest Food Products Association, Associated Builders and Contractors of Wisconsin, and many local chamber of commerce sent a memo urging legislators to co-sponsor and act on the bill.
The Legislature likely will not re-convene until January. When the Legislature reconvenes, enactment of these protections will be a major initiative of the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council.
Jasen Dane Ranch, LLC v. Nelson Hardwood Lumber Company, Inc. (Punitive Damages)
In Jasen Dane Ranch, LLC v. Nelson Hardwood Lumber Company, Inc. (2019AP1774), the Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld a circuit court decision denying punitive damages under Wisconsin’s punitive damages statute.
Facts
J. Nelson Hardwood Lumber Company, Inc., mismarked a property boundary line and, as a result, erroneously harvested trees from a parcel that belonged to Jasen Dane Ranch, Inc. The sole legal question before the Court of Appeals was whether Jasen Dane Ranch, Inc. was entitled to punitive damages. (In other words, not just to the cost of the harvested trees, but extra money because of particularly malicious behavior.) The circuit court held they were not.
Decision
On appeal, Jasen Dane Ranch, Inc. brought two arguments: first, a claim that the circuit court applied the wrong standard of proof when it made its decision. And second, that Nelson Hardwood’s conduct satisfied the standard of conduct set forth in WIS. STAT. § 895.043(3) (Wisconsin’s punitive damages statute).
After an in-depth analysis of the relevant case law, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court decision, determining that under the appropriate standard “a reasonable jury could not find by clear and convincing evidence that Nelson Hardwood was ‘aware’ that its conduct was ‘substantially certain to result in the [Jasen Dane Ranch, Inc’s] rights being disregarded.'” No punitive damages were warranted.