As the Wisconsin Legislature continues to assemble a state budget for the 2021-2023 fiscal biennium, the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council has ensured that several concerning provisions related to civil justice were removed early in the process. As we reported in February, Governor Tony Evers’ executive budget proposal included new civil causes of action for employment discrimination, unfair honesty or genetic testing, broadband service denial, and unnecessarily summoning a law enforcement officer. It also would have restored the ability of private parties to bring a qui tam action against a person for making a false claim with the state, such as Medicaid.

On May 5, the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council partnered with Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. to host a virtual panel discussion on Wisconsin’s rules of civil procedure. Panelists discussed recent changes to the rules that are relevant for many attorneys, including new discovery limits and mandates, rules regarding e-discovery, changes to statutes of limitation, incorporation of federal class action rules, and modifications to the timely claim payment statute.

On April 14, a majority of the seven members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to select Justice Annette Ziegler as the state’s next chief justice. She assumed the office on May 1. Justice Ziegler was first elected to the court in 2007 and ran unopposed in 2017. She is the court’s third longest-serving member. A press release from the court announcing the results of the vote did not indicate how each justice voted.

From 2005 to 2011, Wisconsin had a six-year window where plaintiffs could sue manufacturers of white lead carbonate (a pigment formerly used in some paints) under a tort theory known as “risk-contribution.” Under this theory, plaintiffs can seek damages from a company that produced white lead carbonate used in paint even if the plaintiff cannot demonstrate that the company produced the pigment that caused an alleged injury.

In Mueller v. Bull’s Eye Sports Shop, the District IV Court of Appeals upheld the circuit court’s sanction for spoliation of evidence.

In Thom v. 1st Auto & Casualty Insurance Company, the District IV Court of Appeals determined an insurer’s liability for a vehicle covered but not specifically described by a policy issued by that insurer.

In Rave v. SVA Healthcare Services, the District I Court of Appeals upheld the circuit court’s decision to certify a class in a lawsuit involving fees for medical records.