21-CV-1066 Schroeder v. City of Muskego

Order

The plaintiff moved for leave to amend his complaint challenging the City of Muskego’s sex offender ordinance. The court concluded that the City would not be prejudiced by the amendment. Further, the court concluded that the amended complaint stated a plausible claim that Section 294-3(D) of the City’s sex offender ordinance was an unconstitutional ex post facto law. Therefore, the court gave the plaintiff leave to amend.

21-CV-356 Putzmeister America v. Pompaction Inc.

Decision and Order

20-CV-1305 Anderson v. Elmbrook School District

Decision and Order

11-CV-560 US v. Sikorsky Aircraft

Decision and Order

In the course of resolving the parties’ discovery dispute, the court decided various matters involving the attorney-client privilege, waiver of the privilege, and the crime-fraud exception to the privilege.

21-CV-204 Schutte v. Ciox Health

Decision and Order

20-CV-1519 Delaney v. Beth, et al

Decision and Order

21-CV-412 Breneisen v. Countryside/Chevrolet/Buick GMC Inc

Order

11-CV-560 United States v. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp.

Decision and Order

The court granted summary judgment to the United States on its claim that a government contractor’s agreement with its subcontractor involved a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost system of contracting, in violation of 10 U.S.C. sec. 2306(a). The court also denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on judicial estoppel.

21-CV-959 Sebring v. Milwaukee Public Schools, et al

Decision and Order

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.