Modica v. Verhulst
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1DissentSundby, J.
{dissenting). The issue on this appeal is whether plaintiffs filed a timely notice of claim against a radiology technician, Doug Verhulst, an employee of the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics. The majority concedes that this issue should have been examined under § 893.82(5m), Stats.,1 because plaintiffs seek damages for medical malpractice, but declines to apply the correct statute because plaintiffs failed to argue that the statute applies to their claim. We should summarily affirm rather than decide this appeal under inapplicable statutes. Our decision on the issues as submitted…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- State v. PettitCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1992
- Hansen v. AH Robins, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. HolmesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- Auric v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Waushara County v. GrafWisconsin Supreme Court · 1992
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.