Portage Cnty. v. J.W.K. (In Re Mental Commitment of J.W.K.)
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRebecca Grassl Bradley, J.
*513 *678 ¶1 An issue is moot when its resolution will have no practical effect on the underlying controversy. In this review of a Chapter 51 recommitment order, we consider whether J.W.K.'s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge to the 2016 order extending his commitment is rendered moot because the 2016 order expired after the court extended his commitment in 2017 under a separate order. 1 Reversing the expired 2016 order for insufficient evidence would have no effect on subsequent *679 recommitment orders because later orders stand on their own under the language of the statute. We therefore hold that…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Foucha v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Weinstein v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- State v. PostWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- State v. Raytrell K. FitzgeraldWisconsin Supreme Court · 2019
- Langlade County v. D. J. W.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2020
- Friends of Frame Park, U.A. v. City of WaukeshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 2022
- Marathon County v. D. K.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2020
- Waukesha Cnty. v. S.L.L. (In Re Mental Commitment of S.L.L.)Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2019
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.