Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund

2001 WI 66, 627 N.W.2d 897, 244 Wis. 2d 398, 2001 Wisc. LEXIS 409
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided June 19, 2001·No. 99-2774·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM,

¶ 1. (on motion for reconsideration). The defendant-respondent, David McPherson, seeks clarification of our opinion to make clear that on remand the plaintiffs-appellants do not have any right under Wis. Stat. § 801.58(7) to substitution of the original judge assigned to this case with respect to the Court's directive that the circuit court provide counsel (whose pro hac vice status was withdrawn) with notice and an opportunity to respond. The motion is denied.

[399]*399¶ 2. State ex rel. J.H. Findorff v. Circuit Court for Milwaukee County, 2000 WI 30, 233 Wis. 2d 428, 608 N.W.2d 679, sets forth the applicable law relating to substitutions on remand, and the circuit court will apply the Findorff case should such a request for substitution be filed.

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

Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund, 2001 WI 66, 627 N.W.2d 897, 244 Wis. 2d 398, 2001 Wisc. LEXIS 409 (Wis. 2001).

2001 WI 66 (Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund
2001 WI 66 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2001)