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.
22-CR-113 US v. Pease
Statement of Reason Memorandum
The court set forth the reasons for the sentence imposed on the defendant. The court explained the basis for the mitigating role adjustment awarded the defendant and discussed flaws in the sentencing guideline for methamphetamine offenses.
23-CV-434 Tran v. Wells
Decision and Order
Respondent moved to dismiss Tony Tran’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that both grounds for relief raised were procedurally defaulted. Conceding that Ground One of the petition was unexhausted, petitioner moved to amend Ground Two of the petition to an ineffective assistance claim based on his appellate counsel’s failure to raise a speedy trial violation on direct appeal. Respondent opposed the motion to amend, arguing that Ground Two would be procedurally defaulted even if amended to allege ineffective-assistance-of-appellate-counsel. The court found that petitioner’s proposed amendment would not be futile because the Wisconsin Court of Appeals’ denial of petitioner’s ineffective assistance claim did not rest on an independent and adequate state law ground. The court granted in part and denied in part respondent’s motion to dismiss and allowed petitioner to proceed on the merits of Ground Two of the petition.
23-CV-1355 Russo et al v. BRP US Inc et al
Decision and Order
In a proposed nationwide class action involving warranty claims, the court decided the defendants’ motion to strike the complaint’s class allegations and to dismiss or strike certain legal theories. The court addressed the legal standards for striking class allegations and determined that defendants had not shown that a motion for class certification would be futile. The court also determined that plaintiff’s legal theory for violation of Wisconsin’s direct-marketing regulations failed as a matter of law because the sale of a motorcycle at a motorcycle dealership does not involve direct marketing.
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
Decision and Order
The court determined that it had diversity and supplemental subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act even though the claim did not satisfy the amount-in-controversy and other requirements of the Act’s jurisdiction-conferring provision.
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
Decision and Order
The court decided a partial motion to dismiss a class action complaint in a consumer multidistrict litigation alleging economic losses caused by a defective solar energy power system.
