Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kroner v. Oneida Seven Generations Corp.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 11, 2012No. 2010AP2533Published

1ConcurrencePatience Drake Roggensack, J.

¶ 70. {concurring). This is the first case to come before us based on a nonconsensual transfer of a nontribal member's lawsuit to tribal court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.54. *659We are asked to evaluate whether the transfer to tribal court was lawful. I do not join the lead opinion of Justice N. Patrick Crooks, but rather conclude that the transfer to Oneida Tribal Court was not lawful because: (1) § 801.54 was retrospectively applied in violation of John N. Kroner's vested substantive, constitutional rights, including, but not limited to, his right of access to Wisconsin courts granted by…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Nevada v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Talton v. MayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  4. Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. United States v. LaraSupreme Court of the United States · 2004

24 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