Sampson v. Sampson, 2004 WI 57, reversing 2003 WI App 141, 265 Wis. 2d 803, 667 N.W.2d 831 Issue: “¶2 The question before this court is whether a lawyer’s voluntary production of documents in response to opposing counsel’s discovery request constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 905.11 when the lawyer does not… Read more
E. Privilege, Ch. 905
State v. John S. Cooper, 2003 WI App 227, PFR filed 11/14/03 For Cooper: John A. Birdsall Issue/Holding: ¶19. The test for determining if there has been an impermissible comment on a defendant’s right to remain silent is whether the language used was manifestly intended or was of such character that the jury would naturally… Read more
State v. Jeffrey J. Meeks, 2003 WI 104, overruling State v. Jeffrey J. Meeks, For Meeks: Christopher T. Van Wagner Issue: Whether the trial court, in ruling on competency, improperly relied on its perceptions of the defendant’s attorney in a prior case, in stressing that that attorney hadn’t raised competency. Holding: ¶1 … At issue… Read more
State v. Frederick Robertson, 2003 WI App 84 For Robertson: Jefren Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Where principal issue concerned the complainant’s credibility, indication first revealed after conviction that she had been treated for depression with psychotic features around the time of the incident required in camera inspection to determine whether her mental health records… Read more
State v. Johnny L. Green, 2002 WI 68, affirming unpublished court of appeals opinion For Green: Nicolas G. Griswold Issue/Holding: Viability of State v. Shiffra, 175 Wis. 2d 600, 499 N.W.2d 719 (Ct. App. 1993) upheld, against claim by state that it should be overturned. ¶22 n. 4. State v. Munoz, 200 Wis. 2d 391, 395, 546 N.W.2d 570 (Ct. App. 1996) ratified… Read more
State v. Marc Norfleet, 2002 WI App 140 For Norfleet: Alan D. Eisenberg Issue/Holding: Once the trial court reasonably determines that disclosure of an informant’s identity is required, there is no need to hold an in camera hearing, ¶¶13-14… Read more
Harold C. Lane, Jr., v. Sharp Packaging, 2002 WI 28, on certification Issue/Holding: The attorney-client privilege shields statements from attorney to client, such as billing records only to the extent that disclosure would “reveal[] the substance of lawyer-client communications.” ¶40. The undisputed record here shows that the sought billing records “contain detailed descriptions of the nature of… Read more
Harold C. Lane, Jr., v. Sharp Packaging, 2002 WI 28, on certification Issue/Holding: A former officer and director of a corporation is not entitled to waive the corporation’s attorney-client privilege, even with regard to information generated during the person’s corporate tenure. Under the “entity rule,” the privilege belongs solely to the corporation, and only the corporation may… Read more
