In this edition of the WCJC newsletter, U.S. Senators introduce federal litigation funding transparency legislation, an issue on which Wisconsin is leading the nation. Also, read about several notable Wisconsin Court of Appeals decisions, including issues related to recreational immunity and insurers' duty to defend.
Please contactAndy Cook or Paige Scobeeif you have any questions on these or other civil justice matters.
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to others who may benefit from the information it contains.
Federal Litigation Funding Transparency Legislation Introduced
Federal litigation funding transparency legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Senate. The bill would require the disclosure of third party litigation funding arrangements in class action and multidistrict litigation at the outset of federal cases. Wisconsin led the nation on litigation funding transparency by passing 2017 Act 235 last session.
Langenhahn v. West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. (Recreational Immunity)
In Langenhahn v. West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. (2017AP2178), the Court of Appeals District III held that recreational immunity applied when a pedestrian was injured leaving a community event.
In Anderson v. Kayser Ford, Inc. (2017AP2018), the Court of Appeals District IV held that insurers have a duty to defend insureds in lawsuits where the only indemnifiable claim is dismissed (leaving only noncovered claims to be litigated at the trial level) because the indemnifiable claim could recur on appeal.
In Manthe v. DOT (2017AP1598), the Court of Appeals District IV held that Wisconsin's freeway statute (Wis. Stat. ยง 84.295(3)) does not violate equal protection rights and denied damages to a property owner following the condemnation of his property by the state Department of Transportation (DOT).
Hinrichs v. DOW Chemical Co. (Fraudulent Representation)
In Hinrichs v. DOW Chemical Co. (2017AP2361), the Court of Appeals District II dismissed misrepresentation claims on the basis of the economic loss doctrine, but ruled the plaintiffs might be considered "the public" for the purposes of bringing forth a fraudulent representation claim.
Nutt v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. (Driver Negligence)
In Nutt v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. (2018AP695), the Court of Appeals District III held that Union Pacific was not liable for injuries to a driver struck at a railroad crossing.
Your contribution to the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council will help WCJC promote fairness and equity in Wisconsin's civil justice system, with the ultimate goal of making Wisconsin a better place to work and live.
