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.

08-CV-724 US v. Wisconsin Bell

Decision and Order

Relator Todd Heath brought this qui tam action under the False Claims Act alleging that defendant Wisconsin Bell, Inc. fraudulently obtained subsidies from the federal Education Rate Program by certifying that it was providing telecommunications services to schools and libraries at the lowest rate charged to similarly situated customers. The Court granted Wisconsin Bell’s motion for summary judgment because relator did not show that any customers were similarly situated to the relevant schools and libraries and thus did not show that any certification was fraudulent.

Judge:
Date:
Wednesday, March 23, 2022

21-CV-1373 Wisconsin Family Action v. Federal Election Commission

Decision and Order Denying Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Wisconsin Family Action brought this action under the Federal Election Campaign Act against the Federal Election Commission, alleging, among other things, that the FEC’s interpretation of the disclosure requirements in 52 U.S.C. § 30104(c) unconstitutionally burdens the free-speech, association, and assembly rights of WFA and its donors.  The Court recognized the substantial First Amendment rights at stake but ultimately denied WFA’s motion for preliminary injunction.  The Court found no irreparable harm because the relief sought was not necessary given the FEC’s interpretation of the rules governing campaign contributions.

Date:
Tuesday, March 22, 2022

20-CV-1713 Griggs v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 494

Order Granting Summary Judgment

Plaintiff Teresa Griggs alleged that her employer, Local 494 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, failed to reasonably accommodate her disability when it denied her request to work from home, even when she provided a doctor’s note saying that her asthma made her especially vulnerable to complications associated with COVID-19.  The Court granted Local 494’s motion for summary judgment because Griggs did not show that she is a qualified person with a disability.  Even with her requested accommodation—i.e., the ability to work from home—Griggs cannot perform the essential functions of her job, the majority of which require her to be present in person in the office.

Date:
Wednesday, March 9, 2022

07-CV-303 Burton, 07-CV-441 Owens, 10-CV-75 Sifuentes, 07-CV-864 Gibson, 11-CV-55 Allen et al., 11-CV-425 Valoe et al., 14-CV-1423 Trammell et al., v. American Cyanamid Co et al

Decision and Order

The court granted summary judgment to the defendants in a mass toxic tort action after refusing to reconsider an earlier dispositive ruling and applying that ruling to additional plaintiffs using the doctrines of law of the case and issue preclusion.

Judge:
Date:
Wednesday, March 2, 2022

21-CV-932 RL Mlazgar v. Spring City Electrical

Decision and Order

The court granted in part and denied in part Spring City Electrical Manufacturing Co.’s motion to dismiss. R. L. Mlazgar Associates, Inc. seeks to recover unpaid commissions from Spring City in this diversity action. Mlazgar alleges that it is an assignee to a sales representative agreement between Spring City and Elan Lighting, Inc. Spring City argued that the assignment from Elan to Mlazgar was ineffective because Elan did not obtain Spring City’s prior written consent as required by the sales representative agreement. Applying the agreement’s choice of law provision, the court concluded that Pennsylvania law governs claims arising from the sales representative agreement. The court then held that Mlazgar plausibly alleged that Spring City ratified the assignment despite the anti-assignment provision of the sales representative agreement. The court also held that the choice of law provision barred Mlazgar from raising Wisconsin state law claims with respect to commissions due under the sales representative agreement. The court also held that Mlazgar plausibly alleged the existence of another contract distinct from the sales representative agreement under which it was owed commissions. The court finally held that Mlazgar failed to state unjust enrichment or quantum meruit claims because the company’s entitlement to the commissions allegedly stemmed from contracts.

Judge:
Date:
Wednesday, March 2, 2022

Pages