article thumbnail

“A dispute between Egg Harbor and a popular restaurant has just been settled by the Wisconsin Supreme Court; The Door County village condemned a strip of property at Shipwrecked Brewpub to build a sidewalk, which the property owner claimed was illegal by state statute”

HowAppealing

“A dispute between Egg Harbor and a popular restaurant has just been settled by the Wisconsin Supreme Court; The Door County village condemned a strip of property at Shipwrecked Brewpub to build a sidewalk, which the property owner claimed was illegal by state statute”: Christopher Clough of The Green Bay Press-Gazette has this report.

Statute 100
article thumbnail

Wisconsin Supreme Court rules capacity limit on bars, restaurants, other businesses is invalid

JURIST

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the Department of Health Services (DHS) lacked authority to limit capacities for indoor public gatherings. ” The Tavern League of Wisconsin, along with other businesses, challenged Emergency Order 3, arguing that the order was invalidly enacted. Wisconsin Stat.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down law allowing warrantless blood alcohol testing of unconscious drivers

JURIST

The Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously struck down a state law provision Friday that allowed police to draw blood from unconscious drivers and test it for alcohol content without a warrant. Many courts have addressed the issue of taking blood samples from drivers without consent, including Texas and Nevada.

Statute 197
article thumbnail

Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Sidewalks are Not “Pedestrian Ways” to Allow for Eminent Domain Seizures

JonathanTurley

The scene came to mind with a decision yesterday when the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4-3 in Sojenhomer v. ” Lawyers in Wisconsin are already sending around Bumble-like harrumphs to the decision, which is a testament to the ability of judges to ignore plain meaning to achieve desired results.

article thumbnail

Ohio Supreme Court rules judges not required to defer to state agency interpretations of ambiguous laws

JURIST

The Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas reversed the Board’s decision without affording any deference to the agency’s interpretation of the relevant statute. Later, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals held that a court must defer to an administrative interpretation only if the court finds a statute to be ambiguous.

article thumbnail

Was Rittenhouse’s Possession of the AR-15 Unlawful?

JonathanTurley

In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. It is also hard to instruct a jury on an ambiguous statute.

Statute 53
article thumbnail

Fallout from McGirt and testimony about future crimes

SCOTUSBlog

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in McGirt v. The court thereby stripped Oklahoma state courts of jurisdiction over crimes committed by “any Indian” in “Indian country,” and bestowed the federal government with exclusive jurisdiction to try these crimes. Wisconsin v. Wisconsin v.

Court 104