Bicknese v. Sutula
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentAnn Walsh Bradley, J.
¶ 34. (dissenting). Two very subtle passages in the majority's opinion deserve attention. One has a substantial effect on the outcome of this case and the other affects the development of our law. Both could easily go unnoticed.
¶ 35. The first is a subtle shift in the analysis set forth in ¶ 25 of the opinioj). which erroneously transposes a promise of an offer of employment into an offer of employment. This seemingly slight shift is outcome determinative in this case.
¶ 36. The second is set forth in footnote 2, which at first blush is a rather innocuous statement indicating that "public…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lister v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin SystemWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- C.L. v. OlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1988
- Willow Creek Ranch, L.L.C. v. Town of ShelbyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- Kierstyn v. Racine Unified School DistrictWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
- Energy Complexes, Inc. v. Eau Claire CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.