Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

7. Contempt

Remedial Contempt

Koch v. Neumann, 2010AP1531, District 3, 2/1/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); case activity; BiC; Resp.; Reply The contemnor argues that a remedial sanction (30 days’ jail, stayed for 1 year conditioned on no further violations of prior judgment) imposed by the trial court was unsupported because the contemptuous conduct had already… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Honorable Mark J. McGinnis v. Mario Jimenez, 2010AP2208, District 3, 1/25/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Jiminez: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; Jiminez BiC; State Resp.; Reply The circuit court lacks authority to sanction a 17-year-old for failure to comply with conditions imposed for violating a local truancy ordinance… Read More

{ 1 comment }

Clay Teasdale v. Marinette County Child Support Agency, 2009 WI App 152 Issue/Holding: Case specialist’s request to judge via affidavit and proposed order for remedial-contempt commitment was in fact if not form a “motion” and “was improper on numerous grounds”: it violated the §802.05(1) requirement that aside from pro se litigation motions must be signed by… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Milton J. Christensen, et al. v. Sullivan, et al., 2009 WI 87, reversing 2008 WI App 18 For Christensen: Peter M. Koneazny, Patrick O. Patterson Issue: Whether remedial contempt supports monetary sanction for past acts (here: intentional violations of jail-overcrowding consent decree) where the sanctionable conduct has terminated. Holding: Remedial sanction, including monetary award, is limited to “continuing” contempt of court… Read More

{ 0 comments }

City of Milwaukee v. Ruby Washington, 2007 WI 104, affirming, 2006 WI App 99 For Washington: Wm. Tyroler, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; Karl Otto Rohlich, SPD, Milwaukee Mental Health Amicus: Colleen Ball, ACLU Issue/Holding: ¶66      Moreover, we agree with Washington that remedial contempt was not an appropriate sanction in this case. A contemnor may be imprisoned “only so… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Evans v. Luebke, 2003 WI App 207, PFR filed 10/23/03 Issue/Holding: Contempt is an inherent judicial power, but is legislatively regulated, such that its exercise outside the statutory scheme is proscribed. ¶17. The required statutory procedure is determined by whether the contempt is remedial or punitive. The latter punishes past conduct for the purpose of upholding authority… Read More

{ 0 comments }