≡ Menu

b. Moot

Winnebago County v. J.L.C., 2023AP200, District II, 8/23/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available) Although most litigators believed that arguments about mootness in 51 appeals were now settled, COA resurrects the mootness doctrine to deny relief in this appeal of an expired order. J.L.C. appeals an initial commitment order and accompanying… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Milwaukee County v. T.L.T, 2020AP426, District 1, 5/18/21 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity Two court-appointed examiners failed to file their reports on whether T.L.T. should be recommitted 48 hours before her final hearing. Trial counsel moved to dismiss arguing that the violation of §51.20(10)(b)’s 48-hour rule deprived the circuit court of competency to… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Milwaukee County v. K.M., 2019AP1166, 4/13/21, District 1; (1-judge opinion ineligible for publication); case activity The saga continues. Portage County v. E.R.R. 2019AP20133 presented the question of whether appeals from recommitment orders are ever moot due to their collateral effects. When SCOW split 3-3 in that case, it granted review in Sauk County v. S.A.M… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Bad news, good news on Chapter 51 appeals

The moment Chapter 51 lawyers have been waiting for has . . . been postponed.  This term SCOW was set to decide whether appeals from expired recommitment orders are ever moot. See our post on Portage County v. E.R.R., 2019AP20133. After briefing and oral argument (in which Justice Anne Walsh Bradley did not participate), SCOW… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Sauk County v. S.A.M., 2019AP1033, petition for review granted 2/24/21; case activity Issues for review: 1. Whether S.A.M.’s appeal from his recommitment is moot because it expired before S.A.M. filed his notice of appeal. 2. Whether the county failed to meet its burden of proving dangerousness by clear and convincing evidence. 3. Whether S.A.M. was… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Waukesha County v. L.J.M., 2020AP820, 11/4/20, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity L.J.M. (“Lisa”) appeals the extension of her commitment under ch. 51. In a thorough opinion, the court of appeals affirms, though not without pointing out deficiencies in the county’s case and the circuit court’s decision. Lisa has been committed for… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Jackson County v. C.A.D, 2020AP69, District 4, 9/17/20, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity This is the second time in a week District 4 has dismissed a recommitment appeal as moot despite the claim of collateral effects: a firearm restriction, stigma, possible liability for costs of care. D4 says: “prove they exist!” A fundamental… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Waukesha County v. H.M.B., 202AP570, District 2, 9/16/20, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity This is not your typical Chapter 51 mootness decision.  The county petitioned for the initial commitment of “Heather,” who was suffering from anorexia nervousa. She stipulated to a commitment but not to confinement at a mental hospital or to involuntary… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS