Legal Opinion
Heitman v. City of Mauston Common Council
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided April 29, 1999No. 98-3133PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRoggensack, J.
Mark Heitman appeals from a summary judgment dismissing the complaint which requested a writ of mandamus compelling the City of Mauston Common Council, pursuant to § 9.20, Stats., either to adopt or to refer to a vote of the electorate, without alteration, a proposed initiative affecting the real property within Mauston and for an order, pursuant to § 781.02, Stats., restraining Mauston and its Common Council from entering into any contracts, spending or appropriating public monies on behalf of a secured treatment facility for sexually violent person commitments, as defined in ch. 980 of the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Associated Home Builders of Greater Eastbay, Inc. v. City of LivermoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Fasano v. Board of County Com'rs of Washington Cty.Oregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Schafer v. DEUEL COUNTY BD. OF COM'RS.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- Zwiefelhofer v. Town of Cooks ValleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2012
- Mount Horeb Community Alert v. Village Board of Mt. HorebWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
- Campana v. City of GreenfieldCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
- Mount Horeb Community Alert v. Village Board of Mt. HorebCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.