On Point blog, page 2 of 2
Failure to hold hearing within statutory time limit means circuit court lost competency to decide ch. 54 guardianship petition
Tina B. v. Richard H., 2014 WI App 123; case activity
The circuit court lost competency to decide a guardianship proceeding under § 54.34 because it failed to decide the case within the statutory time limit, but the circuit court’s decisions in a related guardianship proceeding under § 48.977 are affirmed.
Wisconsin Supreme Court finds review of Chapter 54 guardianship case was improvidently granted
Steve P. v. Maegan F., 2013 WI 89, dismissing review of an unpublished court of appeals decision; per curiam (Justice Prosser did not participate); case activity
This is every appellate lawyer’s nightmare–pouring your heart into an emotionally charged case presenting a provocative legal issue briefed by 5 different parties and amici and then having the supreme court declare that review was improvidently granted.
The record for this case is confidential so On Point’s explanation of what happened may be imprecise.
Steve P. v. Maegan F., 2011AP2887, petition for review granted 5/29/13
Review of unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point):
Should the Wisconsin Supreme Court modify the legal standard to be applied in third-party guardianship actions under Chapter 54 so as to require circuit courts to consider the best interests of the child?
Currently, a trial court may transfer custody of a minor child to a third party pursuant to Barstad v.