Legal Opinion · Dissent

Knight v. Milwaukee County

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 19, 2002No. 00-0929Published

1DissentDiane S. Sykes, J.

¶ 57. {dissenting). The majority concludes that Muriel K. is a "person aggrieved" by the guardianship order, and that the Knights, as Muriel K.'s agents under her health care and durable powers of attorney, have standing to appeal on her behalf under Wis. Stat. § 879.27(1). While I certainly agree with the first proposition, I disagree with the second, at least under the circumstances of this case.

*37¶ 58. As the majority notes, the Knights do not argue that they were personally aggrieved by the guardianship order; they wish to appeal only on behalf of Muriel K., by virtue of their status as her…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In Re SylvesterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Guardianship of SmithMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1997
  3. In re Guardianship of McLaughlinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Knight v. Milwaukee CountyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API