State Bar of Wisconsin Return to wisbar.org Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission Decisions


[WP]

DISTRICT III

Office of the Clerk

COURT OF APPEALS

110 E. MAIN STREET, SUITE 215

P.O. BOX 1688

MADISON, WISCONSIN 53701-1688

Web Site: www.courts.state.wi.us

Cornelia G. Clark

Clerk

December 12, 2000

To:

Hon. Paul J. Lenz

Eau Claire County Courthouse

721 Oxford Avenue

Eau Claire, WI 54703-5496

David C. Rice

Assistant Attorney General

P.O. Box 7857

Madison, WI 53707-7857

Diana J. Miller, Clerk

Eau Claire County Courthouse

721 Oxford Avenue

Eau Claire, WI 54703-5496

James M. Ward

Weld, Riley, Prenn & Ricci

P.O. Box 1030

Eau Claire, WI 54702-1030

Sandra Lea Benedict

3642 Livingston Lane

Eau Claire, WI 54701

John D. Finerty, Jr.

Palmer & Finerty, S.C.

20800 Swenson Drive, Suite 425

Waukesha, WI 53186-4081

[Decision Nos. 29689-F, 29690-F, 29691-F]

[NOTE: This document was re-keyed by WERC. Original pagination has been retained.]

You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:

00-2458 Sandra Lea Benedict v. LIRC, WERC, WEAC, Eau Claire

Assoc. of Educators and Eau Claire Area School District

(L.C. #00-CV-308)

Before Cane, C.J., Hoover, P.J., and Peterson, J.

Sandra Lea Benedict, pro se, appeals an order affirming a decision by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) to dismiss her complaint under the Municipal Employment Relations Act. The Labor and Industry Review Commission, WERC and most of the respondents have filed a motion for summary affirmance. Benedict has not filed a response. Because Benedict has disregarded many of the rules of

Appellate briefing, see Wis. Stat. Rule 809.19(1), we will strike her brief and dismiss the appeal.

Benedict's brief is utterly devoid of adequate record citation and her contentions are unintelligible, undeveloped and inadequately briefed. Under Rule 809.19(1)(e), proper appellate argument requires an argument containing the contention of the party, the reasons therefor, with citation of authorities, statutes and that part of the record relied on. We refrain from addressing inadequate arguments. See State v. Shaffer, 96 Wis.2d 531, 545-46, 292 N.W.2d 370 (Ct. App. 1980). Additionally, although Benedict's brief purports to raise a number of issues for review, none of them address either the bases for WERC's decision or the circuit court's order affirming that decision.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the appellant's brief is stricken and the appeal is dismissed. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.83.

Cornelia G. Clark

Clerk of Court of Appeals

2