SCOW grants review to address collateral consequences as applied to ch. 51 mootness
Waukesha County v. R.D.T., 2024AP1390, petition for review of an unpublished decision of the court of appeals, granted 11/17/25; case activity
SCOW granted R.D.T.’s petition for review to address: 1) whether the appeal from his recommitment is moot where the commitment expired but he remained liable for the costs of care and subject to a firearm ban; and 2) whether the circuit court made sufficient factual findings grounded in admissible evidence to support R.D.T.’s recommitment. The COA held that R.D.T. did not overcome mootness because his liability for the cost of care was too illusory and he was subject to a firearms ban based on a recommitment order that was not the subject of the appeal.
We suggested in our post on the COA decision for ch. 51 litigators to continue relying on SCOW’s decision in S.A.M. that appeals from expired commitment orders may not be moot due to ongoing collateral consequences from the commitment order, despite some COA decisions finding the collateral consequences too speculative to overcome mootness. R.D.T. provides SCOW the opportunity to clarify the proof needed to show a collateral consequence is a realistic consequence of an expired commitment order.