These tables are derived from information contained in 22 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions filed between September 1, 2024, and the end of the court’s term in the summer of 2025.  The total of 22 decisions omits orders pertaining to various motions, petitions, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges. 

Also excluded are (1) a per curiam order denying Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s request to be removed as a candidate for President on the November ballot, (2) Scot Van Oudenhoven v. Wisconsin Department of Justice (dismissed as improvidently granted), and (3) Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin v. Joel Urmanski (dismissed as moot because of the decision in Kaul v. Urmanski).

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

One of last year’s posts could have been titled “The Rise of the Liberals,” as we examined evidence of the court’s new liberal sway shortly after years of conservative ascendancy.  Certain indications of this sea change were unprecedented, and the fact that the court’s composition has not altered suggests that similarly noteworthy features are likely to characterize our findings for 2024-25.[Continue Reading…]

With no more decisions expected this term, it’s time to begin our annual exploration of the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s work.  Will the dramatic shifts of 2023-24 prove lasting?  And what surprises—if any—did 2024-25 have in store?[Continue Reading…]

This week yielded far more points than previous batches of decisions—and jolted the top of the standings in the process.  Back in January, the Affirmed seized first place and held that spot all the way through June.  But then, a stunning performance by the Writs (led by Pines Bach, as detailed below) vaulted them over the Affirmed with just days remaining in the season. 

State v. Carl Lee McAdory
The Gavels (of the State Public Defender’s Office), 5 points for a brief and oral argument.

Josh Kaul v. Joel Urmanski, as DA for Sheboygan County, WI
The Writs, 10 points from Pines Bach for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome; 1 point for an amicus brief from Habush, Habush & Rottier; and 1 point for an amicus brief from Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.
The Affirmed, 10 points from Stafford Rosenbaum for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome.
The Waivers, 1 point for an amicus brief from Boardman & Clark.

State v. Joan L. Stetzer
The Writs, 1 point for an amicus brief from Legal Action of Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Department of Corrections, Division of Community Corrections v. Brian Hayes
The Writs, 10 points from Pines Bach for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome.

As detailed below, three teams gained points from a trio of these week’s decisions, thereby tightening up the standings considerably.

Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, Inc. v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
The Writs (5 points for a brief and oral argument from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty).
The Affirmed (3 points for a brief from the WMC Litigation Center and 1 point for an amicus brief from Stafford Rosenbaum).

Wisconsin State Legislature v. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
The Affirmed (1 point for an amicus brief from the WMC Litigation Center).

Service Employees International Union Healthcare Wisconsin v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission
The Waivers (10 points from Quarles & Brady for a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome).
The Writs (5 points for a brief and oral argument from Pines Bach).

Several years ago, a pair of posts examined two important trends in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals: (1) the sharp decline in the total number of decisions issued, and (2) the decreasing percentage of those decisions that were published.  Both trends matter because they affect the volume of precedential authority available to the legal community and the number of cases eligible for supreme court review.  With six more years of data now in hand, this update takes another look at what has—and hasn’t—changed.[Continue Reading…]

This week’s decision in Josh Kaul v. Wisconsin State Legislature bestowed five points on the Waivers for a brief and oral argument by Troutman Pepper Locke—bringing them back into a tie with the Gavels in their see-saw battle for third place.

Click here for the complete standings.

This week’s decision in State v. Kordell L. Grady provided five points to the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office for a brief and oral argument, moving them into sole possession of third place.  Click here for the current standings.

These tables are derived from information contained in 295 Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions that were turned up in a Nexis Uni search for decisions filed between September 1, 1922, and August 31, 1923.  The total of 295 decisions does not include various orders pertaining to petitions, motions, and disciplinary matters involving lawyers and judges. 

Cases are omitted if they were decided during the previous term but appeared in the search results because motions for reconsideration were not decided until 1922-23.  Such cases will be included in the tables for 1921-22.  Also omitted is Seaman v. McNamara—an odd case where the identity of the majority opinion’s author is unclear.  Justice Jones is the apparent author, but in his conclusion he dissents from the court’s decision.  Justice Crownhart also dissents, and Justice Eschweiler dissented “in part” (without authoring an opinion to explain his views).

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) West Allis v. Milwaukee and Shorewood v. Milwaukee; (2) State ex rel. Union Free High School Dist. v. Chaney and State ex rel. Union Free High School v. Robbins; and (3) Milwaukee Electric R. & Light Co. v. Shorewood and Wisconsin General Ry. v. Shorewood.

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

With this week’s decision in State v. H. C., the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office picked up five points for a brief and oral argument, joining the Waivers in third place.  Click here for the current standings.