Faust v. Faust
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Per curiam
Marvin Faust moves for relief pending appeal under Rule 809.12, Stats. He seeks a stay of an order increasing maintenance payable to Sylvia Faust from $1500 to $4000 a month. Sylvia has filed a response opposing the motion. We deny the request for a stay.
Marvin argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a stay pending appeal. Although the grant or denial of a stay is a discretionary act of the trial court, State ex rel. Johnson v. Williams, 114 Wis. 2d 354, 356, 338 N.W.2d 320, 321 (Ct. App. 1983), we are not relegated to simply reviewing the action taken *602by the trial court.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State of Ohio, Ex Rel., Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr. Attorney General of Ohio v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
- Michigan Coalition of Radioactive Material Users, Inc. v. GriepentrogCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- State Ex Rel. Johnson v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983
- In RE MARRIAGE OF LEGGETT v. LeggettCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. GudenschwagerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. GudenschwagerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995