Originalism has stirred much controversy in recent years, with numerous prominent figures taking up cudgels pro and con.  Simply defined, the label originalism stands for the view that such documents as the US and state constitutions should be interpreted as they were understood by the people who drafted them—or, as defenders of originalism have insisted tirelessly, according to the documents’ “original public meaning.”

Nationally, originalism is associated with conservative viewpoints, and such has been the case at the Wisconsin Supreme Court, especially over the last several years following the arrival of a new cohort of conservative justices.  Beginning with the 2019-20 term the court has filed roughly twice as many decisions per term containing non-trivial discussions of originalism as it did from 2015-16 through 2018-19—and approximately five times as many per term as appeared from 2010-11 through 2014-15.^[1][Continue Reading…]

This week’s flood of six decisions delivered points to three of the league’s teams, with the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office the big winners.  By collecting 15 points (10 for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in State v. Junior L. Williams-Holmes and five for a brief and oral argument in State v. Eric J. Debrow) they pulled to within two points of the league-leading Writs—who retained their position at the top of the standings only because of five points from Tracey Wood & Associates for a brief and oral argument in State v. Quaheem O. Moore.  The Waivers completed the scoring with three points from von Briesen & Roper for a brief in 5 Walworth, LLC v. Engerman Contracting, Inc.

Click here for the complete standings.

This week’s decision in State v. Michael K. Fermanich brought 10 points to the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office on the strength of a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome.  As a result, the Gavels have overtaken the Waivers and moved to within shouting distance of the first-place Writs.

Click here for the complete standings.

While three teams were idle his week, the Affirmed gained 10 points from Axley Brynelson for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Thomas G. Miller v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Lyndon Station.

Click here for the complete standings.

This week, the Waivers collected 11 points—10 from von Briesen & Roper for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Allsop Venture Partners III v. Murphy Desmond SC, and one point from Quarles & Brady for an amicus brief in State v. Wilson P. Anderson.  Close behind, the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office received ten points for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in Anderson.

Click here for the complete standings.

The Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office gained eight points this week for a brief, oral argument, and partly-favorable decision—along with an amicus brief—in State v. Corey T. Rector.  (Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Company, Inc. v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau is excluded from consideration, as no majority of justices could agree on a ruling.)

Click here for the current standings.

These tables are derived from information contained in 303 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1939, and August 31, 1940.  The total of 303 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and the like.  In particular, cases are not included if they were decided during the previous term but appeared in the search results because motions for reconsideration were not rejected until 1939-40.  Also excluded are lawyer disciplinary rulings.   

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) Eckhardt v. Judevine (233 Wis. 168) and Eckhardt v. Judevine (233 Wis. 171); (2) In re Hatten’s Estate (233 Wis. 256) and In re Hatten’s Estate (233 Wis. 269); (3) Western Condensing Co. v. Industrial Com. and Wausau Service Oil Co. v. Industrial Com.; (4) J. C. Penney Co. v. Tax Comm.; F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Tax Comm.; and Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Tax Comm.             

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

This week’s decisions showered points on all four teams, but the Writs emerged as the big winners, secure at the top of the standings.  They collected 10 points from Legal Action of Wisconsin for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in State v. Alan S. Johnson and one point from Godfrey & Kahn for an amicus brief in Wisconsin Justice Initiative, Inc. v. Wisconsin Elections Commission.

The Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office picked up two points for an amicus brief and oral argument in Johnson and a point for an amicus brief in Wisconsin Justice Initiative—a case that also delivered a point to the Affirmed for an amicus brief from Stafford Rosenbaum.  An amicus brief by Henak Law Office in Johnson added a point to the Waivers’ total.

This week the court stated that review had been improvidently granted in State v. Daimon Von Jackson, Jr., thereby taking the case out of play.  No other decisions were filed—hence, no change in the standings.

It’s time again for SCOWstat’s annual prediction of the number of decisions that the supreme court will file by the end of its term this summer.  Using the court’s customary pace of work as a guide for assessing the information currently available, we can estimate the final total with confidence.[Continue Reading…]