Filppula-McArthur v. Halloin
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAnn Walsh Bradley, J.
¶1. The petitioner, Attorney James T. Ball (Ball), seeks review in these consolidated actions of two published court of appeals decisions, each affirming an order revoking his admission to appear pro hac vice before a branch of the Brown County Circuit Court. Ball also seeks review of an order assessing costs and fees against him. The court of appeals concluded that the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in revoking Ball's pro hac vice admission in either case and also determined that the assessment of costs and fees was not an erroneous exercise of discretion. We agree…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Richardson-Merrell Inc. v. Koller Ex Rel. KollerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. Roy W. CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Cooper v. HutchinsonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- Smith v. MCI Telecommunications Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1991
- Mtr. of Abrams (John Anonymous)New York Court of Appeals · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Foley-Ciccantelli v. Bishop's Grove Condominium Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. HenleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2009
- Obert v. Republic Western InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 2002
- WJC v. Hon. Scott C. WoldtWisconsin Supreme Court · 2021
- Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation FundWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.