Legal Opinion · Dissent

Keller v. Kraft

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided April 12, 2005No. 2004AP1315Published

1DissentFine, J.

¶ 13. 0dissenting). Although I agree that § 3-23 of the Milwaukee City Charter is not an ordinance within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 102.03(2), I respectfully dissent for two reasons. First, in my view, the institutional interest that finality attend judicial proceedings is not, in this case, overcome by interests of fairness. Second, I do not believe that we have the power to overrule our earlier decision in this case.

I

¶ 14. I agree with the Majority that § 3-23 of the Milwaukee City Charter is not a City of Milwaukee *795ordinance for the reasons ably expressed in the Majority opinion and,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In RE MARRIAGE OF COOK v. CookWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State v. LoWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  3. McGovern v. EckhartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Teubel v. Prime Development, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
  5. State Ex Rel. MacEmon v. ChristieCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1998

2 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