Archives: Caselaw

At first blush, a court of appeals case which is not recommended for publication, but may be cited, presents the common and troublesome issue of a child making choices. Upon closer reading, however, the case is much simpler.

Here is a look at the good, not-so-good and downright worst court opinions of the past year.

At first blush, a recent Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision in Montalvo v. U.S. Title and Closing Services doesn’t appear to affect family law cases at all, but it does.

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals issued a decision, Montalvo v. U.S. Title and Closing Services, LLC, seems to hold that personal service is required, even if the spouse had substantial contacts in the state and the requirements for service by publication were met.

A day late (due to the blizzard), perhaps legally wrong but politically correct, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld the state’s Domestic Partnership law in Appling v. Doyle.

As reluctant as I am to ever compliment the court of appeals (it’s more fun to criticize!), I must play fair and give credit where credit is due.

Be careful of what you may say and listen carefully to what the other side says — and speak up if the other sides misstates the agreement.

Once again, the Wisconsin Supreme Court illustrates the lax discipline it imposes on lawyers in this state.

Wisconsin does not have any legislation or appellate law on surrogacy agreements so the outcome of a recently certified case will have a great effect in that area of law.

Some times the lessons from caselaw could not be more obvious. A recent decision from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals provides such a teachable moment.