These tables are derived from information contained in 296 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1926, and August 31, 1927.  The total of 296 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions and motions. 

Cases are omitted if they were decided during the previous term but appeared in the search results because motions for reconsideration were not rejected until 1926-27.  Such cases will be included in the tables for 1925-26.

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.  For instance: (1) First State Bank v. Harrington and Millar v. Waukegan Nat’l Bank; (2) New York Life Insurance Co. v. State and Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. State; (3) Rusczck v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. and Rutkowski v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co.; (4) State ex rel. Baxter v. Beckley and State ex rel. Nord v. Baxter; and (5) Stephens v. Wheeler and Walbridge v. Wheeler.

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

Last week’s post examined four aspects of decisions from the supreme courts of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa: (1) the number of decisions filed in 2023-24; (2) the length of these decisions; (3) the number of separate opinions; and (4) the distribution of vote margins.  Today, we’ll see how the supreme courts of Wisconsin’s other two neighbors compare in these regards.[Continue Reading…]

Years have passed since our last comparison of midwestern supreme courts, so let’s return for a look at four indicators: (1) the number of decisions filed; (2) the length of these decisions; (3) the number of separate opinions; and (4) the distribution of vote margins.  As Minnesota and Iowa once served as the starting point for these posts, we’ll begin again with them.[Continue Reading…]

Observers of the US Supreme Court have devised methods for determining which justices author the most consequential majority opinions.  For instance, cases described as unusually “salient,” “significant,” or “important” have been identified by the frequency with which they are mentioned in the New York Times and other media shortly after the decisions are released.  Recently, attorney Bill Tyroler kindly brought to my attention a different technique for assessing the importance of US Supreme Court decisions and wondered if it could be applied credibly to the justices in Madison.[Continue Reading…]

Previous posts^[1] in this series have noted an increase in the number of original-action petitions accepted by the supreme court, and today we’ll see if this trend continued over the past three terms.  Although most cases reach the justices in more leisurely fashion—passing through a circuit court and then the court of appeals before reaching the supreme court—the justices may accept a case as an original action, skipping the lower courts altogether.  Such cases serve as an indication of the court’s priorities and sense of urgency—and, particularly for those who disagree with the decisions, evidence of “judicial activism.”[Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 379 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1927, and August 31, 1928.  The total of 379 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges. [Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 385 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1928, and August 31, 1929.  The total of 385 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges. [Continue Reading…]

The season provided the closest competition in the league’s history, with all four teams separated by only six points, and two teams—the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office and the Affirmed—finishing in a tie atop the standings. 

In addition to honoring these co-champions at its awards banquet last week, the league also recognized individual firms that led their teams in scoring: Stafford Rosenbaum topped all firms with 28 points, followed by Pines Bach with 23, and Troutman Pepper with 10.  For the Gavels, Pamela Moorshead and Colleen Marion each contributed 10 points.

The following table provides totals for every individual law firm.[Continue Reading…]

These tables are derived from information contained in 14 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions filed between September 1, 2023, and the end of the court’s term in the summer of 2024.  The total of 14 decisions omits orders pertaining to various motions, petitions, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges. 

Also excluded are: (1) Memorandum Decisions and Orders from Justice Protasiewicz in Rebecca Clarke v. Wisconsin Elections Commission and Stephen Joseph Wright v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, along with other orders in these two cases filed on October 6, 2023; (2) State v. Donte Quintell McBride and State v. Morris V. Seaton, deadlocked (3-3) per curiam decisions; and (3) Amazon Logistics, Inc. v. LIRC and Winnebago County v. D.E.W., both dismissed as improvidently granted.

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

As it commenced the 2023-24 term, the Wisconsin Supreme Court attracted national attention.  With a new liberal majority poised to review significant controversies, observers anticipated rulings that would depart abruptly from the holdings of conservative colleagues who had long exercised the upper hand.  Their predictions came to pass—first with the court’s order in December on electoral maps, followed by decisions on such issues as ballot drop boxes and separation of powers.  In these decisions the liberal ascendancy is most visible.   However, the unprecedented hegemony of the liberals is also striking when portrayed in statistical form, the subject of today’s post.[Continue Reading…]