Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

5. Judicial estoppel

State v. Kenneth A. James, 2013AP2409-CR, District 2, 7/23/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity James insisted on going to trial even though the transcript from the preliminary hearing hadn’t yet been prepared, so he can’t complain now that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek an adjournment so he could get the transcript… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Judicial Estoppel – Generally

State v. Basil E. Ryan, Jr., 2012 WI 16, reversing 2011 WI App 21; case activity ¶32  We begin by addressing the circuit court’s application of the equitable doctrine of judicial estoppel.  Judicial estoppel is intended “to protect against a litigant playing ‘fast and loose with the courts’ by asserting inconsistent positions” in different legal proceedings. State v… Read More

{ 0 comments }

on petition for review of published decision; case activity Issues (provided by court): Can a defendant be found guilty under the forfeiture statutes on the grounds of judicial estoppel where the defendant claims he made no statement to a prior court? Did the undisputed facts on the record establish that if judicial estoppel had not… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Judicial Estoppel

State v. Basil E. Ryan, Jr., 2011 WI App 21; case activity; Ryan BiC; State Resp.; Reply ¶26      “‘Judicial estoppel is a doctrine that is aimed at preventing a party from manipulating the judiciary as an institution by asserting a position in a legal proceeding and then [later] taking an inconsistent position.’”  State v. White… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Frederick W. Rushing, 2007 WI App 227, PFR filed 10/25/07 For Rushing: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: The State’s silent acquiescence to judicial action (sua sponte withdrawal of a guilty plea) didn’t work judicial estoppel bar to mounting subsequent challenge to that ruling, ¶14… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Judicial Estoppel – Objection to PSI

 State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: ¶6       Thexton next claims that the circuit court erred in considering the PSI from his prior conviction. On realizing that the PSI in this case had been prepared with extensive reference to the PSI from Thexton’s prior conviction… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Olson v. Darlington Mutual Ins., 2006 WI App 204 Issue/Holding: ¶4        … The required elements of judicial estoppel are:             First, the later position must be clearly inconsistent with the earlier position; second, the facts at issue should be the same in both cases; and finally, the party to be estopped must have convinced the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Edward W. Johnson, Jr., 2002 WI App 166 For Johnson: Robert T. Ruth Issue/Holding: Judicial estoppel requires that the party’s position be completely adopted. (Johnson therefore not estopped from challenging restitution amount he agreed to below because he also asked for probation but was given some jail time.) ¶24… Read More

{ 0 comments }