Legal Opinion

Portage Cnty. v. J.W.K. (In Re Mental Commitment of J.W.K.)

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 2019No. 2017AP001574PublishedCited by 26 opinions

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

  1. Foucha v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Weinstein v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. State v. PostWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State v. Raytrell K. FitzgeraldWisconsin Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Langlade County v. D. J. W.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2020
  3. Friends of Frame Park, U.A. v. City of WaukeshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 2022
  4. Marathon County v. D. K.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2020
  5. 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.

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

Powered by the Exa API