From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Eneman v. Richter

Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Mar 3, 1999
589 N.W.2d 414 (Wis. 1999)

Opinion

Case Nos.: 96-2893, 96-2895, 96-2916, 96-2917, 96-2937, 96-2938, 96-2939.

Oral Argument: January 6, 1999.

Opinion Filed: March 3, 1999. (Affirming 217 Wis. 288 (table, 577 N.W.2d 386 (Ct App. 1998).)

REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. Affirmed

For all the plaintiffs-appellants-petitioners there were joint briefs by Lester A. Pines and Cullen, Weston, Pines Bach, Madison; Richard F. Rice and Fox Fox, Madison; Mark L. Thomsen and Cannon Dunphy, S.C., Brookfield and oral argument by Mark Thomsen Lester A. Pines.

For the defendants-respondents the cause was argued by John J. Glinski, assistant attorney general, with whom on the brief was James E. Doyle, attorney general.

Amicus curiae brief was filed by Edward E. Robinson and Warshafsky, Rotter, Tarnoff, Reinhart Bloch, S.C., Milwaukee for the Wisconsin Academy of Trial Lawyers.


The court is equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the decision of the court of appeals. Justice Donald W. Steinmetz, Justice William A. Bablitch, and Justice Jon P. Wilcox would affirm; Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, Justice N. Patrick Crooks, and Justice David T. Prosser would reverse. Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson did not participate.

¶ 2. Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.


Summaries of

Eneman v. Richter

Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Mar 3, 1999
589 N.W.2d 414 (Wis. 1999)
Case details for

Eneman v. Richter

Case Details

Full title:ERIKA ENEMAN AND AMY NADLER, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS-PETITIONERS v. PAT…

Court:Supreme Court of Wisconsin

Date published: Mar 3, 1999

Citations

589 N.W.2d 414 (Wis. 1999)
589 N.W.2d 414

Citing Cases

Smith v. Kleynerman

74. Moulas v. PBC Productions, Inc. , 217 Wis.2d 449, 576 N.W.2d 929 (1998) (on petition for review).75.…