Town of Madison v. County of Dane
Wisconsin Supreme Court
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
- State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- Seider v. O'CONNELLWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- Hoida, Inc. v. M & I MIDSTATE BANKWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
- Marder v. BD. OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF WISC. SYSTEMWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
- Marder v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin SystemWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.