By: Ted A. Warpinski As many landowners, developers and builders know, having to obtain a permit to dredge or fill wetlands can cause substantial delays and increased costs. Some relief is now in sight with the recently enacted Wisconsin Act 183, which became fully effective on July 1, 2018. If the exemptions apply, all that is required is a...
By: Todd Farris and Michael Van Someren Sometimes a municipality’s certified survey map approval authority, minimum lot size requirements, or building setback requirements can present an obstacle to an owner’s desire to sell part but not all of his or her property. Whether it is vacant land, a retail shopping center, or a mixed-use project, a...
By: Elizabeth K. Miles Construction contracts often include a clause that identifies a stipulated or “liquidated” damage amount for unexcused delay. These clauses assess a fixed sum for each day of delay, thereby relieving the owner from proving its actual damages caused by delay. Although generally thought to protect the owner, liquidated...
Litigation attorneys, Christopher Meuler and Ted Warpinski, authored a post for the State Bar of Wisconsin’s Construction & Public Contract Law Section Blog. Their blog post, Should We Assume that Assumption Is a Good Idea? State Wetland Permitting and Act 183, discuss the mechanics of assumed jurisdiction and potential benefits and costs in...
By: James M. Kalny Regardless of whether a company is unionized it is subject to Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”) which guarantees employees the right: to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted...
By: Todd Farris In Krueger v. AllEnergy Hixton, LLC, 2017 AP 1802 (Ct App. August 9, 2018) the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, District IV in a 2-1 decision recognized the claim of anticipatory private nuisance but established a high bar to successfully plead one in court. The case involved a lawsuit filed by a group of Town of Hixton landowners who...
By: Davis|Kuelthau's Intellectual Property Team Hot on the heels of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruling that patent trial discovery conduct can result in the invalidating an otherwise valid patent (Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V. (Fed. Cir. 2017)), the CAFC held on June 11, 2018 that a failure of one party to...
By Dillon J. Ambrose & Laurie E. Meyer In Wisconsin Bell v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, et al., decided on June 26, 2018, the Wisconsin Supreme Court made substantial changes to the burden of proving employment discrimination under the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (“WFEA”). In doing so, the Court departed from a long line of cases...
On June 22, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp. This case centered around the question of whether, under the damages provisions of the Patent Act, a patent owner can recover for lost foreign profits when components of a patented invention are shipped overseas for assembly and use. Justice Thomas,...
A recent decision by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin highlights the need for developers and property owners to be clear and precise in drafting restrictive covenants. Richard Forshee v. Lee Neuschwander, Docket Number 2016AP1608, illustrates that even the state’s highest court can have difficulty in understanding and applying owner intent. The...
