Legal Opinion
Matter of Guardianship of Tamara LP
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided June 17, 1993No. 93-0094-FTPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSundby, J.
Tamara P., a proposed ward and alleged incompetent, appeals from an order under sec. 880.12, Stats., determining that she is a proper subject for guardianship, and protectively placing her pursuant to sec. 55.06, Stats. She claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it appointed as guardian ad litem protecting her best interests in those proceedings, the attorney who had previously acted as adversary counsel in the involuntary commitment proceedings preceding the guardianship and protective placement proceedings. We agree.
We apply the "substantial relationship" test…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Wirth v. EhlyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Analytica, Incorporated v. Npd Research, Inc., Defendant-Cross-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. Appeals of Schwartz & Freeman and Pressman and Hartunian ChtdCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Gulf Oil Corporation, and United Nuclear CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
- Novo Terapeutisk Laboratorium A/s v. Baxter Travenol Laboratories, Inc., Gist-Brocades Fermentation Industries, Inc., and Gist-Brocades N. V.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- State v. ShafferCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Knight v. Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
- Coston v. Joseph P.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1998
- Daniels v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2001
- Knight v. Milwaukee CountyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
- Guerrero v. CaveyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.