Oconomowoc School District v. Cota., 2025 WI 11, 4/10/25
In a case tangentially related to defense practice, SCOW clarifies that a Wisconsin statute prohibiting employment discrimination based on arrest records applies to non-criminal offenses, such as an allegation of theft prosecuted in municipal court.
“Subject to limited exceptions, an employer may not terminate an employee because of the employee’s arrest record.” (¶12). § 111.32(1) defines an arrest record as including:
information indicating that an individual has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody or detention, held for investigation, arrested, charged with, indicted or tried for any felony, misdemeanor or other offense pursuant to any law enforcement or military authority.
The question in this appeal is whether the “any…other offense” language pertains to non-criminal offenses. For reasons that are not worth going into the weeds for here, SCOW has no trouble concluding that the statute applies broadly to non-criminal offenses, including violations of the law prosecuted in municipal court as well as first-offense OWIs. (¶¶21-22). Having resolved the statutory construction argument in their favor, SCOW then goes on to hold that the Labor & Industry Review Commission (LIRC) correctly concluded that the Cotas were discriminated against because of their municipal theft citations.
