Bicknese v. Sutula
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentDiane S. Sykes, J.
¶ 58. (dissenting). This case suffers from significant analytical confusion. The majority has evaluated the applicability of various ex*743ceptions to public officer immunity without first addressing the question of whether public officer immunity even applies to the claim on which the plaintiff prevailed in this case. This confusion is not entirely the court's fault. The lower courts made the same mistake (except for the concurrence in the court of appeals), and the plaintiffs positions have been inconsistent in the circuit court and on appeal. The briefs in this court were at best incomplete on…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Lister v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin SystemWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- State v. SchumacherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. PettyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.