You are here

Opinions

Below is a list of opinions specially selected for public release by judges in the district.  For a detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.

Note:  This database does not contain all decisions issued by all judges and is not intended to replace PACER or other more comprehensive case law sites.  The PACER system provides a report of written opinions as defined by the Judicial Conference.  Access to both the report and the opinions is free.  In order to access court records via PACER you must have a PACER account.  For PACER access and online registration, please click here.

15-CV-008 Marshall v. Eckstein

Decision and Order granting petition for relief under § 2254

Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, claiming that his state court conviction and sentence were imposed in violation of the Constitution.  Petitioner, who was sixteen years old at the time of his arrest and interrogation, argued in his petition that the incriminating statements he made to detectives should have been suppressed because they were involuntary and obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).  The court granted the petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Date:
Wednesday, April 22, 2020

20-CV-479 City of Green Bay v. Bostelmann et al

Decision and Order

The City of Green Bay and Kris Teske, in her official capacity as Clerk of the City of Green Bay, and Eric Genrich, personally and in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Green Bay, filed this action against members of the Wisconsin Election Commission, the Secretary Designee of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the Governor of the State of Wisconsin seeking the cancellation of the April 7, 2020, election and the modification of procedures to allow mail only ballots.  The court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the City and its officials, who are suing in their official capacities, do not have standing to assert a claim in light of the political subdivision standing doctrine and that the Mayor’s allegations are too speculative to state an equal protection claim under the Fourteenth Amendment.  Because Plaintiffs could not proceed on their Fourteenth Amendment claims, the court concluded it did not have jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment claims.

 

Date:
Friday, March 27, 2020

07-CV-303 Burton v. American Cyanamid Co et al

Decision and Order re Motions for judgement as a Matter of Law

The court denied white lead carbonate manufacturer’s motion for judgment as a matter of law after finding that plaintiffs who were exposed to lead as children had stated a cognizable claim of negligence based on manufacture of an unreasonably dangerous product and had presented evidence sufficient to support that claim, among other issues.

Judge:
Date:
Thursday, February 27, 2020

19-CV-505 Rickie K. Smith v. Rockwell Automation

Decision and Order

The court found that a complaint stated a claim for relief under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 based on a pension plan’s alleged failure to use reasonable mortality tables when determining actuarial equivalence of pension annuity forms.

Judge:
Date:
Monday, February 10, 2020

18-CV-815 Turner v. Ferguson

Summary Judgement

The court granted summary judgment to Glendale police officers on the plaintiff’s class-of-one equal-protection claim after finding that the evidence in the record would not allow a reasonable jury to find that officers deprived her of evenhanded protection from loose dogs.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, January 7, 2020