State Ex Rel. Buswell v. Tomah Area School District
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1ConcurrencePatience Drake Roggensack, J.
¶ 56. {concurring). Because I conclude that the June 1, 2004 notice of the open meeting was insufficient to satisfy Wis. Stat. § 19.84(2) (2005-06),1 I join the mandate of the court. However, I write separately because in my view the notice for the June 1 meeting does not satisfy the requirements of State ex rel. H.D. Enterprises II, LLC v. City of Stoughton, 230 Wis. 2d 480, 602 N.W.2d 72 (Ct. App. 1999), in regard to § 19.84(2). I also write separately because instead of analyzing whether the subject matter of the notice given for the June 1 meeting is sufficient under H.D. Enterprises and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McGrath v. KristensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- State Ex Rel. Badke v. Village Board of the Village of GreendaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1993
- Jackson County v. State Department of Natural ResourcesWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
- State Ex Rel. Schaeve v. Van LareCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1985
- State Ex Rel. Olson v. City of Baraboo Joint Review BoardCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.