Legal Opinion · Dissent

Town of Madison v. County of Dane

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 2008No. 2006AP2554Published

1DissentPatience Drake Roggensack, J.

¶ 47. (dissenting). I agree with the lead opinion that this case turns on the interpretation of the statutory phrase, "bridge on a highway maintainable by the town," found *428in Wis. Stat. § 81.38(1),1 now Wis. Stat. § 82.08(1).2 However, the lead opinion concludes that a highway must be constructed before the bridge is constructed in order for the bridge to come within the identified statutory phrase from § 81.38(1).3

¶ 48. In my view, the phrase, "bridge on a highway maintainable by the town," identifies a type of bridge by describing the relationship of the bridge to the highway of which it…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Seider v. O'CONNELLWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Hoida, Inc. v. M & I MIDSTATE BANKWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Marder v. BD. OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF WISC. SYSTEMWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Marder v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin SystemWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API