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.

26-CV-316 Hill v. City of Milwaukee et al

Order

On February 25, 2024, a vehicle pursued by two Milwaukee Police Department officers ran a red light at a high speed and T-boned a vehicle operated by Amari Smith, killing him. Smith's estate sued the police officer behind the wheel of the pursuing police vehicle, the Milwaukee Police Department police chief, and the City of Milwaukee. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, arguing there was no constitutional violation. The Court found that plaintiff failed to state a claim against the individual police officer and the police chief acting in his individual capacity. However, it found that plaintiff could proceed on a Monell claim against the City of Milwaukee and the police chief in his official capacity based on allegations that they drafted, implemented, and maintained a police vehicle pursuit policy with deliberate indifference to the known risks to bystanders such as Smith.

File:
PDF icon 26-CV-316 Hill v. City of Milwaukee et al.pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Friday, October 9, 2026

25-CV-194 Ginger v. Froedtert

Decision and Order

Plaintiff brought this action alleging sex discrimination and retaliation by her former employer, Froedtert Health, Inc. Plaintiff claimed that another employee engaged in inappropriate conduct towards her and that Froedtert terminated her for complaining about it. The court determined that the conduct in question did not state a claim for sex discrimination because it was not severe and pervasive. As for the alleged retaliation, Froedtert already had concerns about Plaintiff’s performance and intended to place her on a performance improvement plan before she lodged her internal complaint about sexual harassment. Plaintiff’s insubordinate behavior during the meeting about her performance improvement plan was a legitimate and nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her employment. The court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed this case in its entirety.

File:
PDF icon 25-CV-194 Ginger v. Froedtert.pdf
Judge:
William E. Duffin
Date:
Monday, September 28, 2026

23-CV-876 Doe #1 v. Mukwonago Area School District et al

Decision and Order

Plaintiff, a transgender girl attending Mukwonago Area School District (MASD), filed this case in 2023, alleging that MASD violated her rights under Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause by instituting a policy that barred her from using the girls’ bathroom at school. The preliminary injunction entered on her behalf was affirmed on appeal but later dissolved on plaintiff’s motion as she was no longer subject to the bathroom policy. The U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases related to transgender rights that arguably affected plaintiff’s claims. Defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings as to both claims, and plaintiff moved to compel discovery. The Court concluded that it no longer had subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s Title IX claim because she now seeks damages only for emotional distress. Judgment on the pleadings was denied as to the equal protection claim. Plaintiff’s motion to compel was granted in part for a narrowed timeframe.

File:
PDF icon 23-CV-876 Doe #1 v. Mukwonago Area School District et al (112).pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Tuesday, September 8, 2026

23-CV-948 Kuether v. Posley et al

Decision and Order

Plaintiff, a former employee of the Milwaukee Public Schools, alleges that she was reassigned and subjected to discriminatory terms and conditions in retaliation for First Amendment activity involving her support of the Milwaukee Teachers Association. She also claims she was cut off from speaking during school board meetings, infringing on her First Amendment right to free speech. She alleges that she was discriminated and retaliated against based on her race (white) and sex (female). The court found factual disputes prevented the entry of summary judgment with respect to portions of the First Amendment claims but resolved all other claims in the defendants’ favor. Trial is currently scheduled for May 2027.

File:
PDF icon 23-CV-948 Kuether v. Posley et al (208).pdf
Judge:
William E. Duffin
Date:
Thursday, August 27, 2026

25-CV-1250 Soo Line Railroad Company v. Village of Elm Grove

Decision and Order

Plaintiff Soo Line Railroad Company alleges that the Village of Elm Grove’s condemnation of its land for a stormwater management project is preempted by federal law. The court denied Soo Line’s motion for a preliminary injunction because it failed to demonstrate that condemnation would unreasonably interfere with railroad transportation and, therefore, did not establish a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. The Village thereafter filed a motion for partial summary judgment months before the deadline to do so, but the parties’ conflicting expert opinions created a dispute of fact preventing entry of summary judgment.

File:
PDF icon 25-CV-1250 Soo Line Railroad Company v. Village of Elm Grove (69).pdf
Judge:
William E. Duffin
Date:
Tuesday, July 21, 2026

Pages