Eneman v. Richter

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Eneman v. Richter

589 N.W.2d 414, 224 Wis. 2d 258, 1999 Wisc. LEXIS 14

CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 3, 1999

DocketNos. 96-2893, 96-2895, 96-2916, 96-2917, 96-2937, 96-2938, 96-2939

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 589 N.W.2d 414 (Eneman v. Richter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Eneman v. Richter, 589 N.W.2d 414, 224 Wis. 2d 258, 1999 Wisc. LEXIS 14 (Wis. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. The court is equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the decision of [262]*262the 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. The court is equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the decision of [262]*262the 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

589 N.W.2d 414, 224 Wis. 2d 258, 1999 Wisc. LEXIS 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eneman-v-richter-wis-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack