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-1157 Eaton Corp v. Westport Insurance

Decision and Order

The court held that an insured’s claim for declaratory relief to establish coverage for asbestos claims against high-level excess liability insurers was not ripe, and therefore did not present a case or controversy under Article II of the Constitution, because the insured had not shown a practical likelihood of reaching the excess insurers’ attachment points.

Judge:
Date:
Friday, October 15, 2021

21-CV-243 Gatzke, et al v. City of West Bend, et al

Decision and Order

The court dismissed a claim under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 for failure to give the alleged violator proper pre-suit notice of the alleged violations. The court determined that the notice was defective because it did not provide information sufficient for the alleged violator to determine the date or dates of the alleged violations.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, September 21, 2021

20-CV-349 Conforti v. City of Franklin

Decision and Order

In a case alleging that the defendant police officers used excessive force during an arrest, the court held that an officer could be liable both for using excessive force and for failing to intervene in his partner’s use of excessive force. However, the plaintiff could not recover damages twice for the same injuries.

Judge:
Date:
Monday, September 13, 2021

21-CV-447 Camelot Banquet Rooms v. US Small Business Administration

Order

In a prior order, the court enjoined the U.S. Small Business Administration from excluding strip clubs from the second-draw Paycheck Protection Program because they present “live performances of a prurient sexual nature.” In this order, the court denied the government’s motion to stay the injunction pending appeal.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, August 31, 2021

21-CV-447 Camelot Banquet Rooms v. US Small Business Administration

Decision and Order

A group of strip clubs applied for “second draw” loans under the Paycheck Protection Program. The Small Business Administration informed the plaintiffs that they were ineligible for such loans under a regulation excluding businesses that present “live performances of a prurient sexual nature” from SBA  loan programs. The plaintiffs filed suit alleging that the regulation does not apply to the Paycheck Protection Program and that the regulation is unconstitutional. The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. The court concluded that although the regulation applied to the second-draw program, it violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment insofar as it excluded businesses from the Paycheck Protection Program based on the message expressed by their live performances.

Judge:
Date:
Thursday, August 19, 2021

Pages