The 2022-23 Fantasy League season in underway, with three of the four teams already scoring in multiple cases.  Last year’s champion, the Waivers, have taken the early lead, but they have certainly done nothing to discourage the Gavels or the Writs, as the following summary indicates.  Only the Affirmed have yet to score, but with several months remaining in the season, there is no reason to conclude, yet, that they will again finish in last place.

Click here to see the full team rosters.

The Waivers: (16 points)
von Briesen & Roper, 5 points for a brief and oral argument in Saint John’s Communities, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee.
Henak Law Office, 1 point for an amicus brief in State v. Jeffrey L. Hineman.
Crivello Carlson, 10 points for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Rachel Slabey v. Dunn County, Wisconsin.

The Gavels: (15 points)
David Malkus, 10 points for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in State v. Christopher D. Wilson.
Frances Reynolds Colbert, 5 points for a brief and oral argument in State v. Jeffrey L. Hineman.

The Writs: (12 points)
Habush, Habush, & Rottier, 1 point for an amicus brief in Matthew W. Murphy v. Columbus McKinnon Corporation.
Doar, Drill & Skow, 10 points for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Lindsey Dostal v. Curtis Strand.
Cannon & Dunphy, 1 point for an amicus brief Lindsey Dostal v. Curtis Strand.

The Affirmed: (0 points)

Four years ago, as Justice Shirley Abrahamson reached the end of her judicial career, SCOWstats ran a series of posts designed to assess her influence.  One such approach drew on techniques employed by Richard Posner to count references in law review articles as a means of comparing justices’ stature or significance.^[1]  Today we’ll revisit the topic and see what turns up when this method is applied to the current members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.[Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 198 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1943, and August 31, 1944.  The total of 198 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and the like.  Also excluded are attorney disciplinary rulings.   

When two cases were, in effect, consolidated—one was simply said to be ruled by the decision in the other—the cases are counted as only one: (1) Rahr v. Smith (243 Wis. 497) and Rahr v. Smith (243 Wis. 502); State v. Potokar and State v. Reidel; and (3) International Union, etc. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board and International Union, United Auto. etc., Workers v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board. 

In re Razall’s Will resulted in the 3-3 split and is not included.

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

Not long after the Gavels from the State Public Defender’s Office won the league title for the sixth straight year in the summer of 2021, the Competition Committee disbanded one of the other teams and distributed its law firms among the three remaining contenders, hoping to create more worthy opponents for the Gavels.  During the 2021-22 season it became clear that these efforts had succeeded, as two of the enhanced teams pulled away from the Gavels, leaving them to finish in third place.

Was this a fluke?  With the 2022-23 season now underway, we are about to find out.  As in the past, scoring summaries will be posted here later this month, with weekly updates following until the season concludes in July.  Meanwhile, fans can click on the corresponding links to view the scoring rules and the full team rosters of competing law firms.

These tables are derived from information contained in 190 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1944, and August 31, 1945.  The total of 190 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and the like. 

When two (or more) cases were, in effect, consolidated—one was simply said to be ruled by the decision in the other—the cases are counted as only one: Tews v. Marg and Hemmy v. Marg. 

In Estate of Heller the court found its original mandate (February 13, 1945) to be erroneous and issued a new decision (May 15, 1945).  Both decisions are counted here. 

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

Two terms have come and gone since our last post on attorneys who deliver frequent oral arguments at the Wisconsin Supreme Court, so today we’ll revisit the topic and see which lawyers have been most active—not only over the past two years but also the two years before that.[Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 176 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1945, and August 31, 1946.  The total of 176 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and the like.  Also omitted is Petition of Doar, a per curiam order setting aside the court’s previous abrogation of a statutory rule.

When two (or more) cases were, in effect, consolidated—one was simply said to be ruled by the decision in the other—the cases are counted as only one:  (1) Langworthy v. Reisinger (249 Wis. 24 and 249 Wis. 29); (2) Estate of Bocher and Dillett v. Rollmann; (3) Gottschalk v. Avalon Realty Co. and Ruppa v. Avalon Realty Co.; (4) State ex rel. Martin v. Barrett, State ex rel. Martin v. Glasser, State ex rel. Martin v. Grossen, State ex rel. Martin v. Gussert, State ex rel. Martin v. Heinz, State ex rel. Martin v. Lochman, State ex rel. Martin v. Nickolai, State ex rel. Martin v. Seroogy, and State ex rel. Martin v. Willard. 

Eight justices appear in a number of the tables because Justice Joseph Martin died in March 1946 and was replaced the following month by Justice Ward Rector.

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

Three years have passed since the previous post in this series, and it’s time for another look at the frequency with which women have been delivering oral arguments at the supreme court.[Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 190 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1946, and August 31, 1947.  The total of 190 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, applications, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges.  Among the items excluded is In re Integration of Bar, where the court issued a per curiam ruling dismissing a petition from the president of the Wisconsin State Bar. 

In State v. Jewell the court found its original mandate (April 8, 1947) to be erroneous and issued a new decision (July 1, 1947).  Both decisions are counted here. 

When two cases were, in effect, consolidated—one was simply said to be ruled by the decision in the other—the cases are counted as only one: Senft v. Ed. Schuster & Co. (250 Wis. 406 and 250 Wis. 412). 

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

Recent data on petitions for review allow us to compare petitions submitted during the 2020-21 term with those featured in a post six years ago.^[1]  The previous post, which covered petitions in 2014-15, addressed criminal cases, and we will maintain that focus today in surveying the outcomes of petitions from the State, the Public Defender, private lawyers, and defendants themselves.[Continue Reading…]