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.

21-CV-204 Schutte v. ProHealth Care Inc

Decision and Order Certifying Rule 23 Class Action

Plaintiff Donna Schutte sued ProHealth Care Inc., a health care provider, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. She alleges that ProHealth charged patients a “paper copies” fee to process medical record requests when the records were provided electronically, and that these charges violate Wis. Stat. § 146.83(3f)(b). Over ProHealth’s objection, the court found that the requirements of Rule 23 class certification were met. In particular, it concluded that the common questions shared by the class members predominate over individual questions. It also concluded that many of ProHealth’s arguments went to the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims and were therefore raised prematurely.

File:
PDF icon 21-CV-204 Schutte v. ProHealth Care Inc.pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Thursday, November 20, 2025

25-CV-1562 De La Cruz v. Schmidt

Decision and Order

Petitioner Fernando Lopez de la Cruz, a Mexican national, was arrested and detained pending immigration removal proceedings. Petitioner filed this petition, alleging that the government was illegally detaining him in violation of the Immigration and Naturalization Act ("INA"). He argued that the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") had incorrectly classified him as a noncitizen subject to the provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), a provision that mandates detention pending proceedings, rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which permits noncitizens to be released on bond. More specifically, petitioner argued that § 1225(b)(2) is applicable to noncitizens who are apprehended at or near the time or location of entry, while § 1226 is applicable to noncitizens who are apprehended having lived for some time in the U.S. The Court agreed with petitioner, holding that the plain text of the statute, the legislative history, and the historical interpretation of the statute all indicate that § 1226 is applicable to petitioner.

File:
PDF icon 25-CV-1562 De La Cruz v. Schmidt (18).pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Wednesday, November 19, 2025

08-CV-724 United States of America et al v. Wisconsin Bell Inc

Decision and Order

Relator Todd Heath brought a qui tam action under the False Claims Act alleging that defendant Wisconsin Bell, Inc., fraudulently obtained subsidies by falsely certifying that it was providing telecommunications services to schools and libraries at the lowest rate charged to similarly situated customers for similar services. Wisconsin Bell filed a motion for summary judgment on three grounds. First, Wisconsin Bell argued it could not be liable for any damages because fund from which the subsidies were paid was primarily financed through carrier contributions, not the United States government. Therefore, it argued, the United States could not be injured. Second, Wisconsin Bell argued that Heath's expert inappropriately compared two technologies and two customers that were not similar as a matter of law and, therefore, all related claims should be barred. Finally, Wisconsin Bell argued that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act are unconstitutional.

The Court found that, if Wisconsin Bell is found to have violated the False Claims Act, damages will be available for the entire amount of money in the Fund because any injury to the Fund is an injury to the government. In addition, the Court found that the correct measure of damages is the entire amount of any fraudulently obtained claim. As to the similarity of the technologies and customers, the Court found that genuine issues of material fact precluded granting summary judgment and, furthermore, there was not enough evidence to determine that the comparison is inappropriate as a matter of law. Finally, the Court agreed with numerous other Circuit and District Courts in finding that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act do not violate the Constitution.

File:
PDF icon 08-CV-724 United States of America et al v. Wisconsin Bell Inc.pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Wednesday, October 29, 2025

24-CV-1281 Champion Power Equipment Inc. v. Generac Power Systems Inc.

Omnibus Decision and Order

The court granted the defendant’s motion to include a patent prosecution bar in the protective order governing discovery. The court determined that attorneys who review confidential documents in litigation discovery and then later prosecute patents on behalf of that company’s competitors creates a risk of “inadvertent disclosure.” The court determined that the prosecution bar should only apply to “competitive decisionmaking” attorneys who choose to view certain highly-sensitive material, and found that two of plaintiff’s lawyers were “competitive decisionmakers” as that term is defined.

File:
PDF icon 24-CV-1281 Champion Power Equipment Inc. v. Generac Power Systems Inc..pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Wednesday, September 17, 2025

24-CR-164 USA v. Peter Braun

Decision and Order

The court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress. The court determined that the “private search” doctrine did not authorize law enforcement to conduct a warrantless examination of the contents of a digital file forwarded by an electronic service provider (“ESP”) where the ESP had not visually inspected the contents of that file. The court further determined that the “good faith” doctrine, recognized in Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (2011), did not apply under these circumstances.

File:
PDF icon 24-CR-164 USA v. Peter Braun.pdf
Judge:
Lynn Adelman
Date:
Wednesday, September 3, 2025

Pages