Home ->The State Bar->News ->InsideTrack

InsideTrack

WisBar just got a facelift … more news; simpler, easier to navigate

June 16, 2009 – Saving time ranks right up there with saving money in today’s fast-paced, multi-tasking world. The Internet may help put all the news that’s fit to print right at your fingertips with the click of your mouse, but it can be frustrating when you can’t figure out exactly where to click that mouse. The State Bar’s redesigned WisBar Web site launched today, and it takes that challenge away.

WisBar“Four years might as well be 4,000 when it comes to technology, and that’s how long it has been since the State Bar launched its last Web site redesign,” says State Bar Executive Director George Brown. "Simply said – ‘it was time to get simpler,’ and that’s what we did.”

“The most significant changes appear on the home page,” says Brown. “The home page layout is cleaner, more visually interesting, and easier to read. The new design offers expanded news content, an improved news archive, simplified navigation, and faster access to newly released products and upcoming events, among other changes that improve accessibility.”

Here are the highlights:

More news on the home page – more often. With daily changes to the news content, the left-hand column features 10 news articles at-a-glance, covering topics relevant to the practice of law including:

  • Key court decisions and orders;

  • Relevant, timely, in-depth articles on issues affecting the practice of law;

  • Significant State Bar developments, announcements, and opportunities to engage in bar activities;

  • Legislative developments; and more.

Quick access to news archives. The new archives are now expanded for easier access to all news stories on the site sorted by category. Whether you are looking for a particular article that is no longer on the home page or an article from a State Bar publication, you now can view all news or sort news by the following categories – State Bar, Legislative, Practice, Court, and Around the State.

Of course, Google™ continues to power WisBar’s search function, performing a comprehensive search throughout the site.

Shortcuts are easy to spot. Frequently used shortcuts – Lawyer Search, forms, pro bono, WisLAP, ethics, and classified ads – are easily located on the top right-hand side of the home page – right next to those recognizable icons for quick access to CaseLaw Express™, WisBar InsideTrack, Wisconsin Lawyer™ magazine, and Rotunda Report.

Short cuts for myStateBar, Lawyer Search, Fastcase, and the Google-powered site search are located on the top of every page. Fastcase is a State Bar member benefit that offers free, unlimited access to a comprehensive 50-state and federal case-law data base that includes state, federal appellate, and bankruptcy courts as well as the U.S. Supreme Court, and much more.

Goodbye drop-down menus. Every page includes a “footer” with an easy-to-navigate site map rather than a drop-down menu. The site map is out of the way, but easy to find if you need it, and includes an overview of all site content areas, which can be seen in a single glance. This simplified navigation eliminates frustrating, hard-to-control drop-down menus that frequently interfere with viewing site content, according to member feedback.

Get a bird’s-eye view of CLE Books, Seminars, and other State Bar products. The lower right side of the page includes an easily scanned calendar of upcoming CLE seminars, and graphic images call your eye to recently released CLE books and other State Bar products.

Bookmarking and sharing. Every page, except the home page, now includes the capabilities to bookmark articles for later reference and share articles with colleagues on your favorite social networking sites, like Twitter and Facebook. Look for the share button on the left-hand side of the page.

Accessible to sight impaired. WisBar now is designed in compliance with Section 508 Accessibility Guidelines for the sight impaired, including improved access for color-blind individuals.

“We hope you like the new Web design,” says Brown. “Our goal is to be the premier source of knowledge for members, law-related professionals, and consumers accessing Wisconsin’s legal system. We believe that this new design brings us one step closer to that goal. Take a moment to peruse your new web site, and please, let us know what you think.”

There goes the neighborhood: Government lawyers fight crime by tackling quality-of-life problems

 

By Alex De Grand, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin

June 12, 2009 – Enforcing building codes may not be how people typically think of combating drug dealers and violent crime, but Adam Stephens is doing just that.

crimeStephens is an assistant city attorney in Milwaukee and the coordinator of its Community Prosecution Unit. Stephens puts forward the theory that crime occurs when “a motivated offender finds a vulnerable victim or target at a suitable place.”

With fewer places attractive to criminals, there can be less crime, Stephens and other Wisconsin government lawyers reasoned during a presentation at the State Bar Annual Convention on May 7.

“If a drug dealer gets arrested and charged, I have found in my experience the next drug dealer down the street says, ‘Hey, guess what, I’ve got an opening. I’m going to move in right where he left,’” Stephens said. “So there has to be a follow-up. We have to decrease the suitability.”

A city attorney is uniquely positioned to take those steps toward improving places in a neighborhood, Stephens said.

“As city attorneys we have jurisdiction in Wisconsin to handle public nuisance lawsuits,” Stephens said. “The very generic definition of nuisance is a misuse of property that negatively affects neighboring properties.”

This strategy focusing on neighborhood blight not only potentially disrupts major criminal activity, it also addresses some of the most pressing concerns of its residents.

Community prosecution 

The U.S. Department of Justice explains that prosecutors often find community residents are not as immediately concerned with serious crimes as they are with those that make life in the neighborhood unsafe or unpleasant. Accordingly, community prosecution is about listening to those citizen concerns and delivering solutions.

Working in conjunction with community police units, Jennifer Zilavy of the Madison City Attorney’s Office says that she spends a lot of time meeting residents.

“One thing I’ve really enjoyed … is going out to these neighborhoods and spending many, many hours walking with the police officers,” Zilavy said. “We’ve gone door to door in neighborhoods and introduced ourselves and [asked] residents ‘Are things good with your landlords?’ “Do you feel satisfied with the condition of your building?’”

Zilavy reported this face time alone has brought improvements.

“Just [to] be out there in the community and [to] let people know that we’re there and we’re there to help,” Zilavy said. “I think in a lot of the neighborhoods where we’ve done that, it’s put a different feel into the neighborhood because it’s not just ‘the city attorney whose prosecuting,’ [but that] ‘they’re actually out here getting to know us, they care about what’s going on in the neighborhood.’”

Despite its name, community prosecution is a strategy that works best without resorting to the courts.

“While we do use some of the tools available like the current nuisance ordinance and the state statutes, for a long time Madison has dealt with these problems relatively informally,” Zilavy said, explaining that when she receives a complaint about a property, she arranges a meeting with the landowner.

“Sometimes we’ll have several meetings over the course of six months, up to a year to try to get the landlord to implement ideas that we’ve come up with to abate the nuisance activity,” Zilavy said. “Generally, what we are trying to do is help them take care of the problem so that we don’t have to resort to litigation.”

Stephens said “litigation is when we failed.”

“Litigation doesn’t work,” Stephens said. “It’s scorched earth. You handle a couple of cases, maybe you get something done on that one property. But while I’m in court for an entire afternoon, there’re five other landlords I could be working with. Or two other neighborhoods I could be meeting with and helping them get their block watches working with the police.”

Madison City Attorney Michael May noted that not just the lawyers enforcing the community prosecutions are reluctant to go to court.

“We have found that if you build up the case and you bring a court action, most of the time the mortgage holder jumps in because that’s the last thing they want to see,” May said. “They will bring foreclosure and they will put in somebody new to manage the property.”

Zilavy said in most instances, landlords are receptive to the help the city offers to deal with nuisances. For its part, she said her office -- working with members of the community, the police, and building code enforcement -- attempts to give practical solutions.

“We come up with different strategies they can use to abate the nuisance,” Zilavy said. “And it’s not always eviction. There are other things they can do to help eliminate the illegal activity on the property whether it’s cutting down shrubs that are providing cover for drug dealers, just maintaining the property so that it’s more aesthetically pleasing, maybe increasing lighting in the parking lots.”

Results 

“My assessment, two-and-a-half years into a full commitment to community-based prosecutions, is that we’ve made some real progress,” said Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm, noting positive signs such as reduced violent crime and “a better sense of stability in these neighborhoods.”

May said that community prosecutions has made a difference in Madison, but the work is never finished.

“One of the things you do when you’re successful at ending some of those criminal activities is that they tend to disperse and they move out to different neighborhoods,” said May. “They began to move into neighborhoods where people hadn’t seen this before.”

Madison responded to the public concern by hiring 30 additional police officers and added a position in his office to focus on community prosecutions, May said.

 

Regulating credit card interest rates and fees

This article is published courtesy of the June 2009 edition of Business Law News, published by the State Bar Business Law Section. The State Bar offers its members the opportunity to network with other lawyers who share a common interest through its 26 sections. Section membership includes access to newsletters, email lists to facilitate information sharing, and other resources.

Aaron GaryBy Aaron Gary, Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau

June 17, 2009 – In the midst of the economic downturn and national focus on alleged lending abuses by banks, credit card issuers have been raising interest rates and fees for many borrowers. In April, President Obama summoned credit card industry representatives to the White House for a summit to address mounting concern over card issuer policies and practices.

The rising chorus for credit card reform is fueled in part by the fact that card issuers’ push for higher interest rates and fees comes at a time when many card issuers are receiving federal “bailout” money and the cost of funds to card issuers is at a historic low. In addition, some consumers have experienced a spike in interest rates and fees despite compliance with their card holders’ agreements. For its part, the credit card industry is facing significant challenges, with consumer delinquencies at an all-time high and significant illiquidity in the secondary market for credit card debt (about half of the nation’s credit card debt is securitized and sold to investors in the secondary market, and many fear a meltdown in this market that will parallel the subprime mortgage meltdown).1

credit cardThis article examines the legal framework in which credit card interest rates and fees must be examined, pending federal legislation, and the impediments to effective state regulation.

Usury law applicable to financial institutions

National banks. Many aspects of national bank operations are entirely immune from state regulatory efforts, but setting loan interest rates and fees is not one of them. States may limit the interest rates and fees that national banks organized in the state may charge on open-end credit such as credit cards.

Under sections 85 and 86 of the National Bank Act (NBA),2 a national bank may charge the higher of the interest rate allowed by state law “where the bank is located” or 1 percent over the local Federal Reserve Bank’s discount rate on 90-day commercial paper.3 In Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha,4 the U.S. Supreme Court determined that, for purposes of section 85, a national bank is located in its home state as identified in its charter, not in the state where the borrower resides. The Court held that a national bank may charge its out-of-state credit card customers any rate of interest allowed in the national bank’s home state even if that rate is considered usurious under the law of the state where the card holder resides.5 This is referred to as a national bank’s right to export interest rates from its home state.6

For purposes of section 85, interest has an expansive meaning that encompasses any payment that compensates the creditor for the extension of credit or for breach of the credit terms, including late payment fees, overlimit fees, annual fees, and cash advance fees.7 Thus, the national bank in Smiley, whose home state was South Dakota, could charge its credit card customers residing in California late payment fees allowed under South Dakota law but impermissible under California law.8

Out-of-state state banks. In the late 1970s, as inflation soared and the cost of funds to financial institutions rose, many state-chartered financial institutions were limited by state usury laws in the rate of interest they could charge on loans. In states with low interest rate ceilings, financial institutions had difficulty achieving acceptable returns on investment, given the high cost of funds, resulting in a credit crisis in these states. National banks, able to rise with the inflationary tide, were not subject to the same limitations and gained a competitive economic advantage over their state-chartered counterparts.

In response to these circumstances, Congress passed the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDA),9 which was intended to prevent discrimination against state-chartered banks and to level the economic playing field between national banks and federally-insured state banks. (All state banks chartered in Wisconsin are federally insured.)10 Section 521 of DIDA (also sometimes referred to as section 27 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA)), created an interest rate provision applicable to federally-insured state banks, defined broadly under the FDIA, that mimics the language of NBA section 85 applicable to national banks.11 Courts have determined that this DIDA provision should be given an interpretation parallel to NBA section 85. That is, a federally-insured state bank may export credit card interest rates and fees to out-of-state card holders if the interest rates and fees are allowed in the state bank’s home state, even if they are not permissible in the state of the card holder’s residence.12 However, as discussed below, DIDA section 521 differs from NBA section 85 in that states may opt out of this DIDA provision.

Savings associations and credit unions. DIDA applies not just to federally-insured state-chartered banks, but also to savings associations and credit unions that are federally-chartered or state-chartered and federally-insured. DIDA sections 522 (savings associations) and 523 (credit unions) are virtually identical to DIDA section 521 and also mimic the language of NBA section 85.13 Accordingly, federally-chartered and federally-insured state-chartered savings associations and credit unions may export credit card interest rates and fees to out-of-state card holders if the interest rates and fees are allowed in their home states.14 However, there are two caveats. First, DIDA sections 522 and 523 are subject to the opt-out provision discussed below. Second, under the Federal Credit Union Act (FCUA),15 federal credit unions are granted the power to make loans subject to National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) regulations but may not charge an annual interest rate exceeding 15 percent unless the NCUA authorizes a higher interest rate.16

DIDA’s opt-out provision. Section 525 of DIDA allows states to reject the federal preemption of state interest rate regulation offered by DIDA sections 521 to 523 by adopting a law that “states explicitly and by its terms that such State does not want” these provisions of DIDA to apply in the state.17 Wisconsin elected to opt out of DIDA sections 521 to 523, effective Nov. 1, 1981.18 Accordingly, beginning on this date, federally-insured state-chartered banks, savings associations, and credit unions organized in other states could not export credit card interest rates and fees into Wisconsin. (It is unclear how section 525 was intended to affect federally-chartered savings associations and credit unions.) Wisconsin later reversed course. In 1997 Wisconsin Act 142, effective May 5, 1998, Wisconsin attempted to repeal its prior rejection of DIDA. It is questionable whether, once Wisconsin rejected DIDA preemption in 1981, it could revive that preemption in 1998.

The federal Truth in Lending Act

The Truth in Lending Act (TILA),19 and Regulation Z (Reg. Z) promulgated under TILA by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve),20 generally govern consumer disclosures and credit practices. One of the stated purposes of TILA is to protect consumers against unfair credit card practices.21 Certain provisions of TILA apply to consumer credit transactions, including those using credit cards, and other provisions apply specifically to credit cards, even with respect to transactions that would otherwise be exempt under TILA. TILA and Reg. Z govern such issues as credit card issuance and advertising, required consumer disclosures, account statements, finance charge computations, billing practices and error resolution, and card holder liability.22 TILA and Reg. Z include narrow preemption provisions, basically preempting state law only where there is an inconsistency with federal law.23 TILA and Reg. Z do not establish a national usury standard.

Pending federal legislation

Numerous proposals have been introduced so far in the 111th Congress attempting to curb perceived unfair practices by credit card issuers. These proposals, each of which would amend TILA, include the following:

• H.R. 627 includes changes relating to account practices and consumer options and restricts issuance of cards to underage consumers.

• H.R. 1608 and S. 500 override other federal law to establish a national usury rate (interest and fees) for consumer credit transactions of 36 percent.

• H.R. 1640 and S. 582 override other federal law to establish a national usury rate (on unpaid balances) for consumer credit transactions of 15 percent.

• S. 255 overrides other federal law to limit interest rates and fees applicable in consumer credit transactions to those permitted under state law where the consumer resides.

• S. 392 includes changes similar to H.R. 627 and S. 414.

• S. 414 includes changes similar to H.R. 627 but is more comprehensive and also includes consumer disclosures.

H.R. 627 and S. 414 have emerged as the front-runners; each has passed committee and seems to be generally supported by the President.24 H.R. 627 passed the House on April 30, 2009, with amendments requested by the Obama administration.25 Both H.R. 627 and S. 414 focus on credit card issuer practices, rather than establishing a national usury rate for credit cards or authorizing states to impose usury rates on federally-chartered financial institutions. These two bills, H.R. 627 in particular, are quite similar to federal regulations already set to take effect on July 1, 2010.26 (Update: H.R. 627 was signed by the President as P.L. 111-024 on May 22, 2009.)

Impediments to Wisconsin legislation

Effective May 17, 1996, Wisconsin eliminated interest rate and fee limits for open-end credit transactions, such as credit cards, and also specified that such fees are interest for purposes of the NBA and DIDA.27 The stated purpose of this legislation was to enable Wisconsin-based creditors to compete with out-of-state creditors, who take advantage of federal law to charge interest rates and fees allowed by their home states to Wisconsin residents.28

Having repealed its usury law in 1996, Wisconsin could decide to reinstate it, particularly if Wisconsin policymakers believe that efforts on the federal level for credit card reform have not gone far enough. Wisconsin could enact a new usury law limiting the interest rates and fees charged by credit card issuers and the law would be effective against all of the following: state banks, savings banks, savings and loan associations, and credit unions chartered in Wisconsin; national banks with a home state of Wisconsin; and out-of-state state-chartered banks, savings associations, and credit unions. However, Wisconsin’s usury law would not be enforceable against out-of-state national banks and out-of-state federally-chartered savings associations and credit unions that issue credit cards to Wisconsin residents. National banks located in states such as South Dakota, Nevada, and Delaware, where there is no interest rate limit, may charge Wisconsin residents any interest rate on the credit cards issued by these banks regardless of Wisconsin law.

At the end of 2002, national banks held almost 75 percent of all credit card debt in the United States.29 Following the Marquette decision, major credit card issuers migrated from states with restrictive usury laws to states with lenient or no usury laws.30 As a result, in 2003, national banks located in six states with favorable usury laws originated more than 70 percent of the nation’s credit card debt.31 A more recent study concluded that the top 12 credit card issuers hold about 88 percent of the national market share for credit card debt. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s Web site includes a list of national banks and their home states, and it appears that most or all of the top issuers of credit cards are national banks located in states with no interest rate limit on credit cards.

Accordingly, legislation in Wisconsin to limit credit card interest rates and fees is likely to have little impact on the practices of major credit card issuers and is unlikely to assist most Wisconsin credit card holders. For Wisconsin legislation to have a meaningful impact, there would need to be changes in federal law or a uniform act adopted by all states establishing a national limit for interest rates and fees on credit cards.

Endnotes

1See Stephen Labaton, Obama Pressures Credit Card Issuers on Rates, N.Y. Times, April 24, 2009; Editorial, The Credit Card Trap, N.Y. Times, April 6, 2009; Lisa Lerer, Credit Companies Brace for W.H. Visit, Politico, April 23, 2009; Taking a Look at Credit Card Trends, NPR’s All Things Considered, April 22, 2009.
212 U.S.C. § 21 et seq.
3See 12 U.S.C. §§ 85 and 86.
4439 U.S. 299, 99 S. Ct. 540, 58 L. Ed. 2d 534 (1978).
5See Marquette, 99 S. Ct. at 542, 548.
6Id. at 548, 550.
7Smiley v. Citibank, 517 U.S. 735, 116 S. Ct. 1730, 1732-33, 1736, 135 L. Ed. 25 (1996).
8Smiley, 116 S. Ct. at 1735-36. See also Beneficial Nat’l Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 123 S. Ct. 2058, 2061, 2063-64, 156 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2003); 12 C.F.R. § 7.4001 (2009).
9P.L. 96-221, 94 Stat. 132 (1980).
10See Greenwood Trust Co. v. Com. of Mass., 971 F.2d 818, 826-30 (1st Cir. 1992). See also Grunbeck v. Dime Sav. Bank, 74 F.3d 331, 338-40 (1st Cir. 1996); Gavey Properties v. First Financial, 845 F.2d 519, 521 (5th Cir. 1988).
11See 12 U.S.C. §§ 1813 (a) (2), 1831d. See also 94 Stat. at 164-65.
12Greenwood Trust, 971 F.2d at 821, 824-27, 831; In re Community Bank of Northern Virginia, 418 F.3d 277, 294-96 (3rd Cir. 2005). See also Discover Bank v. Vaden, 489 F.3d 594, 603-08 (4th Cir. 2007), rev’d on other grounds, Vaden v. Discover Bank, __ U.S. __, 129 S. Ct. 1262, 173 L. Ed. 2d 206 (2009).
13See 12 U.S.C. §§ 1463 (g) and 1785 (g). See also 94 Stat. at 164-66 (12 U.S.C. § 1730g was repealed and reenacted as 12 U.S.C. § 1463 (g) under the Home Owners’ Loan Act (HOLA)).
14See Yeomalakis v. FDIC, __ F.3d. __ (1st Cir. April 3, 2009); Gavey Properties, 845 F.2d at 521; 12 C.F.R. §§ 560.2 and 560.110.
1512 U.S.C. § 1751 et seq.
16See 12 U.S.C. §1757(5)(A)(vi); 12 C.F.R. §§ 701.21(b) and (c).
17See 94 Stat. at 167.
18See Laws of 1981, ch. 45, § 50.
1915 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.
2012 C.F.R. § 226.
2115 U.S.C. § 1601(a).
22See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1605, 1606, 1631, 1632, 1637, 1642-45, 1663, 1666 to 1666j; 12 C.F.R. § 226 subpt. B.
23See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1610, 1666j; 12 C.F.R. § 226.28.
24See Labaton, supra; Lerer, supra; Two Legislative Approaches to Reining in Credit Card Companies, N.Y. Times, April 24, 2009.
25See Marcy Gordon, House Passes Credit Card Bill That Helps Consumers, Associated Press, April 30, 2009.
26See Truth in Lending, Final Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 5244, 5397–5421 (Federal Reserve 2009), and Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices, Final Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 5498, 5559–84 (Federal Reserve, OTS, and NCUA 2009) (modifying Reg. Z and Regulation AA of the F.T.C. Act, relating to certain unfair credit card and revolving credit practices, application and solicitation practices, and consumer disclosures).
27See 1995 Wis. Act 328.
28See LRB drafting file for 1995 A.B. 830.
29See Mark Furletti, The Debate Over the National Bank Act and the Preemption of State Efforts to Regulate Credit Cards, 77 Temple L. Rev. 425, 425 (2004).
30Id. at 441-43.
31Id. at 443.

Aaron R. Gary, Univ. California-Davis 1992, is an attorney with the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau. 

Abating nuisances and community prosecutions: Madison’s strategy for fighting neighborhood crime

 

Jennifer Zilavy of the Madison City Attorney’s Office explains the strategy of “community prosecutions,” a means of fighting drug trafficking and other serious crimes by focusing on smaller, quality-of-life issues. Zilavy discusses her meetings with landlords to abate nuisances and her preference for informal resolutions rather than protracted litigation. Zilavy outlines some of the practical solutions the city has been able to give landlords other than simply evicting troublesome tenants.

Zilavy spoke at the Government Lawyers Division program at the State Bar Annual Convention in May.

State Bar

State Bar recognizes local bars for implementing public service projects

 

June 17, 2009 – The State Bar recognized eight local bar associations for public service projects at the Bar Leaders’ Conference held this spring. The awards, funded in part by the Local Bar Grant Competition (LBGC), were presented by committee chair Ben Brantmeier. Projects included:

  • running free legal clinics and teen court programs;

  • producing publications and videos in English and Spanish for pro se family law litigants and small claims court;

  • publishing a newspaper insert focusing on the separation of powers and how the judicial branch of government protects citizens’ rights;

  • creating a Restorative Justice Programming Website for attorneys, justice workers, and the public;

  • publishing a brochure for students that highlights federal and state laws that deny financial aid for drug-related convictions; and

  • offering free continuing education to train attorneys who accept pro bono appointments in federal cases.

“The quality and responsiveness of the local community service programs put forth by State Bar members is exceptional,” said Ben Brantmeier, Chairperson of the Local Bar Grant Competition Subcommittee chair Ben Brantmeier. “These awards recognize the ability and willingness of Wisconsin attorneys to address needs of their neighbors while promoting a positive image of lawyers who care about their community.”

Local Bar Grant Recipients Representing associations accepting awards (first row, from left): LBGC chair Ben Brantmeier; David Westrup, Wisconsin Hispanic Lawyers Association; Jennifer Susek, Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association; Katherine Seifert, Winnebago County Bar Association; (second, from left): Antonique Williams, Wisconsin Association of African American Lawyers (WAAL); Anthony Baish, Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association; Alan Hougum, Marathon County Bar Association; Jennifer Binkley, Dane County Bar Association; (third row), the Hon. Darcy McManus, Tri-county Bar Association, and Lynnette McNeely, Wisconsin Association of African American Lawyers (WAAL).

The following local bar associations received awards:

Awards of Exceptional Achievement

The Dane County Bar Association (DCBA) produced a video in both English and Spanish that guides pro se Family law litigants through the courtroom experience. This is the second video of the Moving On:Family Law Video series. The first video, “Moving On: A Guide to Pro Se Divorce,” also is available in both English and Spanish.

In accepting the award, Madison attorney Jennifer Lyn Binkley noted that the DCBA is producing a third video that will address the thorny issues surrounding child placement, custody, and support. “Our goal for making the series available is to give pro-se litigants visual and written information so they can be more confident as they navigate the process.” Find out more.

The Winnebago County Bar Association (WCBA) was recognized for a newspaper insert it created in 2008 to help fellow citizens observe Law Day. Working in coordination with other Fox Valley bar associations, the WCBA created an insert that focused on the separation of powers and how the judicial branch of government protects citizens’ rights. The insert included a column by Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, pertinent parts of the U.S. Constitution, educational activities, and information about sources of free and low-cost legal representation.

Attorney Katherine Seifert, who accepted the award on behalf of the WCBA, credited attorney Jessica King with bringing the ambitious project, which is now in its fourth year, to a successful completion. Seifert explained that the insert is a supplement to Law Day classroom visits by area attorneys who discuss the rule of law and our justice system with students. Find out more.

David Westrup David Westrup accepted the award for WHLA.

The Wisconsin Hispanic Lawyers Association (WHLA) translated into Spanish the Milwaukee County Small Claims Court Manual for use in the Pro Se Clinic of the Milwaukee County Small Claims Court.

The value of a bilingual manual of this kind is very clear to the dozen or so people who visit the clinic each week notes WHLA president Carlos A. Ortiz. Speaking from a personal perspective Ortiz says, “As a son of two immigrants and a lawyer who serves clients within the Latino community, I have seen first-hand the inherent barriers within the legal system. There is still a long way to go before we can accurately state that there is equal access to justice. The Small Claims Manual, however, serves as a step in the right direction.”

Find out more.

The Marathon County Bar Association developed and implemented the Restorative Justice Programming Web site, which provides information for attorneys, justice workers, and the general public, concerning restorative practices. Volunteer attorneys created the content on the web page and educate the public by speaking at various community events.

“The Marathon County Restorative Justice Program (MCRJP) was launched five years ago based on a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused by criminal behavior through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders,” said Rothschild attorney Anza D’Antonio, one of the project’s coordinators. She explained that the program is currently limited to juvenile offenders, most referred to it by juvenile court. “Ninety-eight percent of teens going through the program fulfill the promises they make to the victims and the courts as a part of the MCRJP process,” she noted. Find out more.

Awards of Outstanding Achievement

The Wisconsin Association of African American Lawyers (WAAL) produced “Jeopardizing College Financial Aid: Drug Crimes and the Consequences, a brochure that highlights federal and state laws that deny financial aid from the date of a drug-related conviction. WAAL supplements the booklet with school talks, posters, and other outreach activities that show youth how valuable an education is and the risks posed to it by drug-related crimes.

Lynette McNeely Lynette McNeely

We talk about the perils of selling drugs and how that can affect your ability to get financial aid,” said attorney N. Lynnette McNeely. “We were able to improve the choices that some of the students made. Our goal was to develop a brochure that offers unambiguous and authoritative information young people can use to prepare themselves to get a good education and achieve their full potential. In order to protect their access to funds that will be essential to their future educational opportunities, they need to know the potential consequences of using and selling controlled substances.” McNeely said that while drug-related crimes are sometimes perceived as an “inner-city” issue, they are spreading to other communities and that the brochure could be used more broadly across the state. Find out more.

The Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association was recognized for launching a free continuing education program to train attorneys who accept pro bono appointments in federal cases pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Anthony Baish Anthony Baish

“This free CLE program educates attorneys about the types of cases in the Eastern District of Wisconsin where pro bono representation is needed and outlines issues that routinely arise,” noted attorney Anthony Baish. “It is available free of charge to participating attorneys in exchange for their willingness to accept pro bono appointments. So far about 45 attorneys have been added to the pro bono pool as a result of the initiative.” Find out more.

The Tri-county Bar Association developed and implemented a Teen Court Fundraising Project, which offers teens charged with relatively minor offenses a new option to resolve their cases by confronting their own behavior in the Buffalo-Pepin County Teen Court.

James Duvall The Hon. James Duvall

“The Buffalo-Pepin County Teen Court is a highly structured and effective way to guide youth away from serious criminal activity by showing them that their decisions have both immediate and long-term consequences,” noted Buffalo-Pepin Circuit Court Judge James Duvall. “It offers an opportunity for some first-time offending juveniles to clear their record and give something back to the community.”

“We all can make a difference, much more than we can possibly imagine, just by trying,” he said. Find out more.

Award of Achievement

Ozaukee County Bar Association (OCBA) members regularly volunteer their services at free legal clinics for self-represented individuals. Last year, the OCBA installed a computer at the Ozaukee County Courthouse that has significant benefits for the individuals and the courts. In the past, pro se litigants typically had to complete forms by hand, which created challenges for both litigants and court staff.

Attorney Donald Roy Fraker noted that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has created an online Self-Help Center that generates completed forms when users answer a series of questions. “The access to the Self-Help Center that this equipment now allows, not only assists people who are representing themselves but also reduces the number of incomplete and difficult-to-read handwritten documents court staff have to handle, thereby improving the overall efficiency of court operations,” Fraker said. Find out more.

About these grants. The LBGC makes funds available to local bar associations for new public service projects. Bar associations can receive up to $2,500 in grant monies for a new, useful and topical public service project that has statewide application. The next deadline to apply for a fiscal year 2009 - 10 grant is Dec. 30, 2009.

For more information about the Local Bar Grant Program, contact Kris Wenzel, (800) 444-9404, ext. 6185.

Foundation awards grants to public service programs – from training to court interpreters to youth diversion programs

 

June 17, 2009 – The Wisconsin Law Foundation recently awarded $20,000 in grants to law-related programs in Wisconsin.

"The Wisconsin Law Foundation is proud to bestow grants to these programs, which truly epitomize the basis upon which the Foundation is built – to promote the public's understanding of the law and to improve the administration of justice," says Grants Committee Chair Mark A. Pennow. "We commend these organizations for their efforts."

Grants for 2009 were awarded to the following programs:

  • CentroLegal, $2,000, to expand its Family Law Outreach Project. Founded in 2008, this program educates people who are considering representing themselves in Family Court regarding basic family law issues and common court procedures.

According to Milwaukee attorney, Heather Van Vugt Ramirez, who serves as CentroLegal executive director, “In 2008, CentroLegal focused the Family Law Outreach program on creating the class curriculum and translating it into Spanish. We now have refined the educational materials and have streamlined our presentation style.

“We are so thankful for the grant we recently received from the Wisconsin Law Foundation,” says Ramirez. “We are continuing to seek opportunities to expand our Spanish class offerings, and the grant funds are allowing us to do so. To date, we have offered 23 family law classes – 20 in English and 3 in Spanish. The courses were hosted by nonprofit organizations and community groups and attendance was driven by the host organization’s effort to recruit participants. In 2009, we hope to expand classes to a broader group of nonprofit and community organizations and thus reach a more diverse group of Milwaukee residents. We also will be more proactive in publicizing the classes and will look for opportunities to invite the general public.”

A major milestone achieved in 2008, was the translation of many course materials into Spanish, which will help us to offer more classes for Spanish-speaking and bilingual audiences in the upcoming year,” says Ramirez.

Carmel A. Capati, Court Interpreter Program Manager says, “According to the Migration Policy Institute, between 2000 and 2007, the foreign-born population in Wisconsin has increased 30.1 percent, from 193,751 to 252,150. As a result, there are more families and individuals from other countries appearing in circuit court proceedings with language and other cultural barriers. To ensure equal access, most courts around the state rely on interpreters regularly.

“While Spanish represents about 80 percent of the courts’ language needs for interpretation, the court system as a whole is experiencing an increase in rarer languages requests,” says Capati. “In 2007 and 2008, the court used interpreters of at least 40 different languages. Locating trained and qualified interpreters for less common languages has been problematic for courts. On occasion, the courts have brought interpreters from other states at considerable expense or have set matters over because of an inability to locate a qualified interpreter.”

 

  • Waukesha County 180˚ Juvenile Diversion Program, $2,000, to help 14-20 year old youths that commit a first-time misdemeanor or low-level felony who decide to turn their lives around and begin a new path.

During the nine-month Waukesha County 180˚ Juvenile Diversion Program, participants attend classes that address many of the criminogenic factors leading to delinquent behavior. Participants meet for two to three hours two nights a week for 14 weeks, which is followed by six months of case management, similar to probation, and a commitment to 40 hours of community service. Upon completion of the program, charges may be dropped or reduced at the discretion of the district attorney.

Clients are referred to the program from the District Attorney’s Office, Health and Human Services, State Public Defender, courts, police officers, lawyers, and parents. For more information about this program, call (262) 548-7780.

About the Foundation. The Wisconsin Law Foundation is the charitable arm of the State Bar of Wisconsin and is dedicated to enhancing the law through education and service. Foundation membership is open to all Wisconsin-licensed lawyers. General membership begins with a $50 donation. Gifts for less than $50 qualify you as Friend of the Wisconsin Law Foundation.

Joining is easy. You can make your annual donation when you receive your State Bar membership statement, which is mailed in the spring and is due to the State Bar by July 1. If you haven’t mailed your statement yet, simply mark the Foundation box on your State Bar membership statement and include your donation.

Upcoming Events

Member Services

Members can save up to 26 percent on UPS shipping

 

logoJune 17, 2009 – The State Bar recently announced a special savings program on United Parcel Service (UPS) shipping. Members can receive discounts on UPS air and international shipments, saving up to 26 percent off UPS air and international Express Shipping.

Three ways to send your packages. Package pick up and delivery can be processed from UPS web page, by calling (800) PICK-UPS, or by bringing packages to any UPS drop-off point. Arrangements for package pick up for future or same day service can be made via the phone or the web.

Tracking your package. Once a package is shipped, members can track its progress by using UPS Quantum View NotifySM. This service also can send notifications when packages are picked up, when they are delivered, and when there are exceptions. Exception notification lets users know when and why a package may not meet its original scheduled delivery date and provides the rescheduled date of delivery. 

Legislative

Assembly passes state budget; Senate action expected this week 

June 15, 2009 – The state Assembly passed its version of the proposed 2009-11 biennial state budget on Saturday, June 13, by a 50-48 vote. State Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker has announced plans for the Senate to take up the bill this week. Legislative leaders have said repeatedly they intend to complete action on the budget by June 30.

The Assembly version of the budget contains a number of initiatives supported by the State Bar of Wisconsin, including expanded financial eligibility for State Public Defender representation and a significant boost in state funding for indigent civil legal services. These initiatives were first added to the budget by the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee, which completed action on the proposed state budget, Assembly Bill 75, on May 29.

Among the budget changes adopted by the Assembly were amendments removing provisions that would have modified contributory negligence and joint and several liability, thereby retaining current law. However, the Assembly kept budget provisions allowing the stacking of auto insurance policies and requiring increased coverage minimums. The Assembly also restored $5.4 million in cuts that Joint Finance had made to the Department of Justice budget. In doing so, the Assembly also modified a provision Joint Finance had added to create a $1 million annual appropriation in the Department of Justice to provide $1,700 raises each year to approximately 600 assistant district attorneys and assistant state public defenders. The Assembly made the creation of that appropriation discretionary, not mandatory.

It remains to be seen whether the changes made by the Assembly will be acceptable to the Senate. It is expected Senate democrats will have their own slate of amendments that will have to be reviewed by the Assembly and potentially resolved in a conference committee between the chambers before final legislative approval and review by the governor. In the Senate, democrats hold an 18-15 majority.

Although legislative leaders have said they hope to complete the budget by June 30, work on past budgets has often extended beyond that date. Developments last week originally appeared to threaten legislative leaders’ plans to complete action on the budget quickly. Democratic members of the Assembly met in caucus for several days last week to approve various amendments making significant changes to the spending plan. With a slim 52-46 majority and one additional Independent who sometimes caucuses with the democrats, Assembly leaders appeared to face an uphill battle to achieve the 50-vote majority necessary for passage in that house. However, late last week Assembly leaders announced they were confident they had at least 50 votes for a budget plan they had devised, and in the end they were proven correct as the Assembly’s lone Independent joined 49 democrats to vote for the proposal. Two democrats voted against the budget and one democratic member of the Assembly was absent because of a family illness. No republican members of the Assembly voted for the budget.

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau’s summary of the changes proposed by the Assembly democratic caucus can be found online, and a summary of the changes by the Joint Finance Committee can be found here. A complete history of the legislation can be found on the Wisconsin Legislature’s Web site.

Continue to monitor WisBar.org and visit the State Bar’s Government Relations page for updated budget information.

Related articles:

Assembly plans to take up state budget Thursday – June 10, 2009
Joint Finance completes budget: the good, the bad and the ugly – June 1, 2009
Joint Finance expands SPD eligibility, boosts indigent civil legal services – May 27, 2009
Governor and legislative leaders outline new deficit reduction plan – May 22, 2009
State budget crisis deepens – May 13, 2009
Joint Finance Committee Approves Budget for Courts, Related Agencies – April 22, 2009
State Bar update on 2009-11 state budget – April 8, 2009
State agency briefings address Governor’s budget proposal – March 25, 2009
Joint Finance Co-Chairs announce public hearing schedule for budget bill – March 10, 2009
State Bar of Wisconsin responds to Governor Doyle’s budget – February 25, 2009
State Bar President praises initiatives in Governor’s budget proposal – February 17, 2009 

Lawyers testify in favor of bill boosting hourly rate for public defense appointments

By Alex De Grand, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin

June 2, 2009 – A bill introduced in the Wisconsin Assembly aims to raise the hourly rate paid to private attorneys who accept cases from the State Public Defender from $40 to $70 an hour.

clockLawyers lined up at the state capitol today to offer testimony in support of Assembly Bill 224 before the Committee on Judiciary and Ethics. A law firm is a small business with overhead costs that continue to rise whereas the rate for indigent defense has been frozen by statute since 1995, the committee learned.

“I sit before you today as a solo practitioner able to tell you that in a streamlined operation with one part-time paralegal, my overhead costs run roughly $70 an hour,” said State Bar President Diane Diel. “You can do the math on where that leaves me $30 in the hole if I were to take $40 an hour appointment cases.”

Diel and Past State Bar President Gerry Mowris emphasized that this bill is about small businesses. “The typical Wisconsin lawyer is a small business owner,” Diel stated in prepared testimony. “In fact, of the approximately 3,800 law firms in Wisconsin, 92 percent or about 3,500 are small businesses with five or fewer lawyers. Fully 70 percent or 2,657 of those law firms are solo practices consisting of only one lawyer.”

“The small businesses Wisconsin lawyers operate are woven into the fabric of Wisconsin’s economic life,” Diel continued. “Wisconsin lawyers provide employment, pay taxes, and support other businesses around the state.”

Mowris added that traditionally the law firm accepted an appointment so that a young lawyer could gain experience under the supervision of an older attorney. This critical mentorship that cultivates the next generation of practitioners is impractical when the appointment represents such a tremendous loss of money. This is a loss to the profession and the society it serves, he said.

The State Bar’s Board of Governors has a long-standing public policy in support of raising the SPD rate to a level that fairly compensates lawyers for their time and is equal to those set by the Wisconsin Supreme Court for court-appointed attorneys.

‘It is the right thing to do’ 

Private practitioners explained that they continue to accept public defense cases because they believe they have an obligation to ensure the fairness of the criminal justice system.

Madison attorney Joanne Keane explained that she is trained for the far more lucrative field of patent law. “But I choose to do public defender work because it is the right thing to do,” she said.

“’Liberty and justice for all,” Keane said. “’It’s as simple as that. And if those words don’t mean anything, then, frankly, I don’t know what does.”

But the attorneys said that there are practical limits to what they can do.

“I am a charitable, generous and committed individual,” said Wausau attorney Peter Rotter. “It is my obligation to give back to society, and I do so. But, that doesn’t make it acceptable for the state to take advantage of me.”

Rotter said he has resorted to cost-saving measures used by other lawyers. He has one person on his staff, but “I don’t pay well, and I can’t offer health benefits.” Rotter said his other clients charged at his customary rate effectively subsidize his public defense work.

“That is no way to run a system of justice,” Rotter said.

“Why hasn’t this [rate] been raised already?” asked Madison lawyer Erik Guenther, a member of the Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers board of directors. “Well, this involves compensation for criminal defense lawyers. People don’t like criminal defense lawyers… And the reason for that is when I’m on TV, I’m usually standing next to somebody who everybody has just saw his mug shot. And sometimes they are in an orange jumpsuit.”

But Guenther said that the system is not perfect and he asked lawmakers to consider the importance of a defendant’s due process rights, despite current popular hostility.

“It’s been a long time since we read To Kill A Mockingbird,” he said. “Instead, we have Cops and Law and Order.”

Effect on the courts 

Larry Peterson, president of the Wisconsin State Public Defender Association, explained that his members work with the private bar because “the system has to be healthy across the board in order to produce healthy results.”

If lawyers in private practice are discouraged from stepping forward to accept appointments from the SPD, Peterson said this can have serious consequences for finding conflict counsel. Victims are among those affected by delays created by an inability to find willing and competent legal counsel, added Deb Smith, the director of the SPD Assigned Counsel Division.

Preempt a lawsuit? 

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Frederick Kessler (D-Milwaukee), said that part of his motivation to seek a rate increase was to head off a legal challenge to the fairness of Wisconsin’s indigent defense system.

“I introduced this bill because I am appalled at the fact that we have continued to pay people at an hourly rate that was only $5 more than the hourly rate established in 1978,” Kessler said. “I understand the nature of the financial crisis the state is facing, but I think we are in a situation where at some point somebody is going to challenge this $40 an hour rate as not providing adequate counsel and adequate compensation to counsel to be able to do that. And we are going to be ordered by the state or federal court somewhere to say, ‘I’m sorry. We have to pay a reasonable rate to attorneys so that we can ensure adequate representation.”

Kessler said that he would have actually preferred a rate even higher than that proposed in his bill. Most Wisconsin counties pay private attorneys at the state supreme court rate of $70 per hour to take court appointments or serve as guardians ad litem, according to testimony from the SPD.

Other professionals who contract with the state commonly have their compensation set by market demand, the SPD noted. The state procurement hourly rate for a video editor is $225 and a photographer’s rate is $112 to $200 an hour.

Practice

West's Jury Verdicts, Bench Decisions, Settlements, and Arbitration Awards

 

As a service to its members, the State Bar of Wisconsin has entered into an alliance agreement with West, a Thomson Reuters business, to provide award information on Wisconsin civil jury trials, bench trials, settlements, and arbitrations. West’s editorial staff selects a few key Wisconsin cases from West's® Jury Verdicts – Wisconsin Reports to highlight in each issue of WisBar InsideTrack.

© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this Web site for their own personal and noncommercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters/West content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters/West.

State Bar members can:
  • Request a full case summary, free of charge
  • Submit their own case results for publication in West's® Jury Verdicts – Wisconsin Reports, the print and online versions, free of charge
  • Order a paid subscription to the print and/or online versions of West's® Jury Verdicts – Wisconsin Reports
  • Contact West: west.juryverdicts@thomsonreuters.com or 800-689-9378

For State Bar members submitting their own results for publication, West will:
  • Send the submitter a free copy of the West's® Jury Verdicts – Wisconsin Reports print newsletter in which the case summary is published
  • Consider featuring the case in the State Bar's WisBar InsideTrack e-newsletter

This edition's featured cases:
Featured case highlights:


New S.B. 20 authorizes circuit courts to award compensatory and punitive damages

During the legislative session, State Bar members offer their opinions on the bills affecting their practice areas. The following is the opinion of the State Bar members authoring the article. It is not necessarily that of the State Bar or its sections.

Thomas N. Shorter Thomas N. Shorter
Daniel J. Finerty Daniel J. Finerty
John A. Haase John A.
Haase

By John A. Haase, Thomas N. Shorter, and Daniel J. Finerty, Godfrey & Kahn, S.C.

Gov. Doyle signed Senate Bill 20 into law on June 8, 2009. S.B. 20, now known as 2009 Wisconsin Act 20 (Act 20), authorizes Wisconsin Circuit Courts “to order a person who engages in discrimination in employment, unfair honesty testing, or unfair genetic testing [in violation of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act] to pay compensatory and punitive damages.” These damages may be awarded in addition to any equitable damages awarded in an administrative action in front of the Wisconsin Equal Rights Division (ERD), not to mention any damages sought or awarded in a federal court action.

Although the issue is still under review, the legislative change may violate the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I Section 5 of the Wisconsin Constitution, which both guarantee the right of trial by jury. Notably, Act 20 authorizes a circuit court to order the defendant to pay compensatory and punitive damages “in an amount that the circuit court or a jury finds appropriate.” However, in doing so, Act 20 puts the “cart before the horse” and does not provide the defendant employer the right to jury trial on the underlying issue of liability for discrimination. An ERD hearing on the merits presided over by an administrative law judge likely does not fit the definition of a “jury trial” under either constitutional provision.

Here are some highlights of the new law:

  • If an administrative law judge (ALJ) determines that discrimination occurred after a Hearing on the Merits, the ERD will mail the decision along with a notice to the complainant that he or she may bring an action in circuit court to recover compensatory and punitive damages as well as the time limitations for doing so. Act 20 does not authorize the filing of an action unless and until: (1) a hearing on the merits has taken place (i.e., Act 20 does not implicate hearings on the issue of probable cause); and (2) the ALJ makes a finding of a violation of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act, as set forth above.

  • Proceedings in front of the ERD must conclude prior to the filing of any such lawsuit in a circuit court. Thereafter, any civil action must be filed within 60 days of the date of mailing of the final decision by the ERD or its appellate body, the Labor and Industry Review Commission, to the complainant.

  • The Department of Workforce Development itself is also authorized to file such an action to recover compensatory and punitive damages, which is more likely to occur in cases of alleged class-based discrimination, as opposed to individual cases.

  • Compensatory and punitive damages may be sought in addition to any back pay remedy, reasonable costs, and attorney fees incurred in the action, or other amount awarded under existing Wisconsin law. Such damages may be awarded by a judge or by a jury, which sets up the right to a jury trial on the issue of this new damage category.

  • Compensatory damages include future economic losses and for pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other noneconomic losses.

  • Punitive damages may be awarded, but are subject to the existing limitations on such awards under Wisconsin law contained in Wis. Stat. § 895.043. Under this provision, to be entitled to such an award, the plaintiff must show “the defendant acted maliciously toward the plaintiff or in an intentional disregard of the rights of the plaintiff.” Wis. Stat. § 895.043(3). Assuming the plaintiff makes a prima facie showing for the allowance of punitive damages, “[t]he plaintiff may introduce evidence of the wealth of a defendant” and request a special verdict form on the question of punitive damages from the circuit court. Wis. Stats. § 895.043(4)(a) - (b).

  • The combined compensatory and punitive damages that may be awarded under Act 20 are capped based on the number of employees working for the employer in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding year:

  • If the employer employed 100 or fewer employees during this period, damages are capped at $50,000.

  • If the employer employed more than 100 but fewer than 201 employees during this period, damages are capped at $100,000.

  • If the employer employed more than 200 but fewer than 501 employees during this period, damages are capped at $200,000.

  • If the employer employed more than 500 employees during this period, damages are capped at $300,000.

  • Entities that are exempt from coverage under Act 20 include “any local government unit, as defined in [§] 19.42(7u), [Wis. Stat.] or [...] any employer, labor organization, or employment agency employing fewer than 15 individuals for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or proceeding year.”

  • The change brought about by Act 20 will go into effect the second day after publication of the 2009 - 2011 biennial budget act, which is still under debate in the Wisconsin Legislature.

In short, business attorneys need to be prepared for this new change in Wisconsin law, which likely will lengthen the time between a complainant’s initial filing of an ERD claim and a final resolution of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation cases filed under the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act. An early analysis of whether settlement is the most cost-effective option should be performed. If a defense is the preferred option, laying the groundwork for a solid defense early on, including any potential constitutional arguments and other affirmative defenses, will yield greater success down the road and perhaps lessen the overall costs of achieving that success.

John Haase, Valparaiso 1991, Thomas Shorter, Northeastern 1996, and Daniel J. Finerty, Marquette 1998, practice labor and employment law with Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. in Green Bay, Madison, and Milwaukee, respectively.

• Have a different opinion? Post a comment.

Court

Recent jury verdicts, bench decisions, settlements, and arbitration awards

Article printed above.