SCOWstats has, until now, measured the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s recent activity against earlier years of the court’s work.  Other reference frames are also available, however, and today launches what I hope will be the first in a series of posts comparing the output of the Wisconsin Supreme Court with that of its counterpart in Minnesota—paying particular attention to some of the themes featured in previous posts devoted solely to Wisconsin.

I selected Minnesota because it resembles Wisconsin more closely than most other states—location, climate, economy, demographics, and so forth—while recognizing that it would likely be just as interesting to compare Wisconsin’s supreme court with that of a state that has little in common with the Midwest, especially a state where the justices are appointed rather than elected.  That will have to wait for another day, though, as Wisconsin’s western neighbor takes precedence for now over more exotic alternatives.[Continue Reading…]

Today’s decision in State v. Salinas earned the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office five points (for a brief and oral argument) as they try to hold off the Citations and the Waivers, their two closest challengers.

Multiple locations on the Wisconsin court system’s website introduce visitors to the moving story of Lavinia Goodell.[1]  In 1875, after she had begun practicing law in Rock County the previous year, Goodell sought permission from the Wisconsin Supreme Court to argue a case in that forum.  A unanimous three-justice panel denied her petition in an opinion written by Chief Justice Edward Ryan in 1876.  Although he deemed women fit for a variety of functions, Justice Ryan concluded that “the profession of law is surely not one of these.”  After all, he explained, “the peculiar qualities of womanhood” gave rise to a “tender susceptibility,” “emotional impulses,” and a “subordination of hard reason to sympathetic feeling,” among other traits unsuitable in the legal profession.  Instead, nature had prepared women “for the bearing and nurture of the children of our race and for the custody for the homes of the world …”  Activities contrary to the “sacred duties of their sex, as is the profession of law, are departures from the order of nature; and when voluntary, treason against it.”[Continue Reading…]

Today’s decision in Peggy Z. Coyne v. Scott Walker brought one point to the Waivers (from the amicus brief filed by Boardman & Clark), leaving them a single point back of the second-place Citations.

The release of St. Croix County Department of Health and Human Services v. Michael D. brought the Office of the State Public Defender five points for a brief and oral argument, thereby nudging the Gavels into first place, just two points ahead of the Citations.  The Waivers are only four points back in third place, with the Affirmed and the Writs trailing badly.

The other decision released today— Cheryl M. Sorenson v. Richard A. Batchelder—did not affect the standings.

These tables are derived from information contained in 70 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions filed between September 1, 1991, and August 31, 1992.  The total of 70 decisions does not include rulings arising from such undertakings as (1) disciplinary proceedings against lawyers; (2) bar admission issues; and (3) various motions and petitions.

In School District of Shorewood v. Wausau Insurance Companies, the court withdrew the decision that it had filed on May 20, 1992, and replaced it with a decision filed on August 27, 1992.  The August 27 decision is included in the total of 70 decisions noted above, while the May 20 decision is not.  However, information from the May 20 decision does appear in the “Number of Oral Arguments Presented” table.

The tables are available as a complete set and by individual topic according to 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

On the strength of an amicus brief filed in Walworth State Bank v. Abbey Springs Condominium Association, Boardman & Clark picked up one point for the Waivers, now only two points behind the Citations at the top of the league’s standings.

Following a recent post’s observation that an unusually large share of cases coming before the supreme court during the current term are per curiam decisions from the court of appeals, a reader wondered if a significantly higher percentage of all court of appeals opinions had been per curiam decisions in 2014-15—which might help explain why the supreme court’s calendar contains a larger proportion of per curiam decisions than in the past.  The concern stems from the nature of per curiam opinions, which are unsigned rulings reserved for cases of lesser significance—those not presenting “new or unsettled questions of general importance.”  Indeed, they may not even be cited as persuasive authority.[1]

We’ll begin by determining the percentage of all cases decided by the supreme court that had arrived as per curiam decisions from the court of appeals.  The results (displayed in Table 1 for the terms currently covered by SCOWstats) indicate that the percentage has been considerably higher in recent years than in the early years of the period—never exceeding 9% in the 1990s and never falling below 15% since 2010-11 (with the figure for 2015-16 predicted to rise as high as 26%). [Continue Reading…]

The decision in State v. Lagrone today brought five points (for a brief and oral argument) to the Gavels of the Office of the Public Defender, pulling them even with the Waivers and only three points back of the league-leading Citations.

As a result of its participation in Yasmine Clark v. American Cyanamid Company—a brief, no oral argument, and a 3-3 outcome—Quarles & Brady picked up four points and pulled its team (the Waivers) to within three points of the league-leading Citations.