On Point: 3. Civil Commitments

Waukesha County v. M.A.C., 2024 WI 30, 7/5/24, reversing an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)

In a big defense win, 6 justices agree that M.A.C. is entitled to relief, with four justices joining together to dismantle SCOW’s prior decision in S.L.L. with respect to notice and default judgment in Chapter 51 proceedings.

Douglas County v. K.A.D., 2023AP1072, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision granted 6/17/24; case activity (including briefs)

In an interesting grant, SCOW agrees to review this freestanding appeal of an expired medication order.

Washington County v. T.R.Z., 2024AP21, District II, 6/19/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

Although “Tim’s” appeal presents several issues for review, COA dismisses the appeal as moot given the existence of an intervening Watts review.

St. Croix County v. B.T.C., 2023AP2085, 6/11/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In the second decision this week reversing a circuit court’s commitment order under Chapter 51, the COA concludes that respondent telling a police officer that he would “bring the chief to justice” not sufficient to establish the respondent is “dangerous.”

Marathon County v. N.R.P., 2023AP638, 6/11/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In yet another Chapter 51 reversal, COA finds fault with both the circuit court’s decision to admit and rely on hearsay evidence and its failure to make the required findings.

Outagamie County DHHS v. L.C.E., 2023AP929, District 3, 6/4/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

There was insufficient evidence for the protective placement order because the County failed to prove that “Lauren” was “so totally incapable of providing for . . . her own care or custody as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to . . . herself or others,” as required by § 55.08(1)(c).

Brown County v. R.J.M., 2024AP206, 5/7/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

Despite the doctor’s imprecise and generic testimony, COA holds that admission of his report resolves any deficiencies in the record and affirms.

Racine County v. P.Z., 2024AP146-FT, 5/1/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In a relatively straightforward appeal of a recommitment order, COA rejects P.Z.’s sufficiency challenges and affirms.

Marinette County v. C.R.J., 2023AP1695-FT, 4/16/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

C.R.J. (“Caleb”) challenged his commitment on two fronts: (1) the circuit court’s failure to comply with Langlade County v. D.J.W.’s “specific factual findings” mandate and (2) the county failed to introduce sufficient evidence of dangerousness under either standard. After critiquing the circuit court’s factual findings, the court agrees with Caleb that insufficient evidence existed to involuntarily commit him.

State v. J.S.,, 2024AP180 & 2024AP181, 4/16/24, District I (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

On appeal from TPR orders related to her two children, J.S. (“Julia”) raised two issues: whether the circuit court had personal jurisdiction over her and whether the circuit court erred by granting the GAL’s substitution request. The court of appeals makes short work of each argument because Julia forfeited the claims by not first raising either issue in the circuit court.