On Point blog, page 1 of 4
Appellant forfeited right to challenge circuit court exercising concurrent jurisdiction with tribal court over guardianship proceeding because objection to jurisdiction not raised in circuit court.
Monroe County v. G.L.B., 2025AP2239, 9/24/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA held that the appellant forfeited his right to appeal the circuit court exercising concurrent jurisdiction with the Ho-Chunk Nation tribal court on Monroe County’s guardianship petition because he did not raise his arguments in the circuit court.
COA finds challenge to contempt order in CHIPS case moot
Manitowoc County HSD v. K.H., 2025AP1865, 7/8/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
Confronted with a relatively straightforward challenge to the circuit court’s discretion, COA finds that no exceptions to mootness require it to address K.H.’s arguments.
COA dismisses appeal related to remedial sanction for contempt of court for nonparty in CHIPS case
Manitowoc County HSD v. K.H., 2024AP1717, District II, 12/23/25, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (including briefs)
COA dismisses as moot an appeal from the circuit court’s order that resulted in K.H. serving 20 days of a remedial sanction for contempt of court.
COA rejects challenges to discretionary order in CHIPS case and affirms
State v. A.B., Jr., 2024AP2454-56, 12/16/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a rare CHIPS appeal, COA applies the discretionary standard of review and affirms.
COA orders new trial in CHIPS proceeding because circuit court excluded evidence that respondent executed power of attorney to guarantee child’s care while she was in custody
State v. A.C.S, 2024AP1634, 9/10/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s dispositional order entered after a jury found “Anna’s” child was in need of protection or services (CHIPS) and ordered a new trial because the court excluded evidence that Anna executed a power of attorney to guarantee the child’s care while she was in custody.
COA affirms order denying child’s request for change of placement in CHIPS case
Sheboygan County DH & HS v. N.H. & E.H., 2025AP903-FT, 9/10/25, District 2 (one-judge decison; ineligible for publication); case activity
“Luke” appeals from an order denying his request to change his placement back to his father’s home in a CHIPS case. COA affirms.
COA affirms CHIPS dispositional orders finding that circuit court exercised proper discretion in denying respondents’ petition to transfer jurisdiction to tribal court, authorizing County to exercise medical decision making, and admitting evidence of father’s risk assessment
Monroe County v. G.L.B., 2024AP1596, 4/3/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
Monroe County v. T.B., 2024AP1845, 4/3/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA issued two decisions affirming the circuit court’s dispositional orders finding that T.B.’s (the mother) and G.L.B.’s (the father) son was in need of protection and services (CHIPS) and placing the child in out-of-home care. The COA rejected the parents’ arguments that the circuit court erroneously denied their petition to transfer jurisdiction to Ho-Chunk Tribal Court and that the court erred in granting medical decision-making authority to the Monroe County Department of Human Services (the Department). The COA also disagreed with the father’s argument that the circuit court erroneously admitted at trial evidence regarding risk assessments of his parenting skills.
In published decision, COA holds that corporation counsel is not a party under 48.13 when they are not a petitioner
S.G. v. Wisconsin DCF, 2024AP472, 4/3/25, District IV (recommended for publication); petition for review granted 3/11/26; case activity
In a unique CHIPS appeal, COA clarifies the proper role of corporation counsel when another party files a CHIPS petition.
Defense Win! COA remands for new CHIPS trial
State v. T.D.V., 2024AP2057-FT, 1/22/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The State fails to adequately respond to T.D.V.’s argument that his substitution request was improperly denied, so COA remands the matter for a new trial.
COA holds that trial court properly removed adversary counsel in CHIPS case; reverses order reducing lawyer’s fee
Richland County DH&HS v. D.M.K., 2022AP2190, District IV, 11/14/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a somewhat rare CHIPS appeal, COA upholds the circuit court’s decision to remove adversary counsel but reverses the court’s order modifying that attorney’s request for fees.