EQUAL PROTECTION
The fact that there is no mandatory release date for persons convicted of 1st degree murder as there is for other crimes does not amount to denial of equal protection. Bies v. State, 53 W (2d) 322, 193 NW (2d) 46.
There is a meaningful distinction between governmental employes and nongovernmental employes. The strike ban imposed on public employes is based upon a valid classification and the legislation creating it is not unconstitutional as a denial of equal protection. Hortonville Ed. Asso. v. Jt. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 66 W (2d) 469, 225 NW (2d) 658.
Statutory distinction between parolees out of state under 57.13, 1987 stats. [now 304.13] and absconding parolees, denying extradition to the former but not the latter, is constitutionally valid classification under Omernik test. State ex rel. Niederer v. Cady, 72 W (2d) 311, 240 NW (2d) 626.
In order for female prostitute to avoid prosecution upon equal protection grounds, it must be shown that the failure to prosecute male patrons was selective, persistent, discriminatory and without justifiable prosecutorial discretion. State v. Johnson, 74 W (2d) 169, 246 NW (2d) 503.
Mandatory sentencing provision of 343.44 (2) does not deny equal protection. State v. Sittig, 75 W (2d) 497, 249 NW (2d) 770.
See note to 70.995, citing State ex rel. Ft. How. Paper v. Lake Dist. Bd. 82 W (2d) 491, 263 NW (2d) 178.
Equal protection does not require symmetry in probation and parole systems. State v. Aderhold, 91 W (2d) 306, 284 NW (2d) 108 (Ct. App. 1979).
Discriminatory prosecution discussed. Sears v. State, 94 W (2d) 128, 287 NW (2d) 785 (1980).
Doctrine of necessaries, which imposes secondary liability on wife for necessaries furnished by creditors to family unit, does not deny equal protection. Marshfield Clinic v. Discher, 105 W (2d) 506, 314 NW (2d) 326 (1982).
It does not violate equal protection to classify employes according to retirement date for purpose of pension benefits. Bence v. Milwaukee, 107 W (2d) 469, 320 NW (2d) 199 (1982).
Protective placement under ch. 55, 1983 stats., violates equal protection in that no periodic, automatic reexaminations of need for continued placement are required. State ex rel. Watts v. Combined Community Services, 122 W (2d) 65, 362 NW (2d) 104 (1985).
Grandfather clause in "tied house" statute creates perpetual exception from police power regulation for purely economic reasons, denying equal protection. Wis. Wine & Spirit Institute v. Ley, 141 W (2d) 958, 416 NW (2d) 914 (Ct. App. 1987).
Prostitution raid focusing only on female participants amounts to selective prosecution in violation of equal protection; in depth discussion of constitutional analysis. State v. McCollum, 159 W (2d) 184, 464 NW (2d) 44 (Ct. App. 1990).
There is no right to jury trial in recommitment proceedings under 971.17 (3), due process clause or equal protection clause. State v. M. S. 159 W (2d) 206, 464 NW (2d) 41 (Ct. App. 1990).
A prisoner who is a defendant in a civil tort action is entitled to a meaningful opportunity to be heard; where no liberty interest is at stake there is no constitutional right to appointed counsel, and there is a rebuttable presumption against such appointment. Piper v. Popp, 167 W (2d) 633, 482 NW (2d) 353 (1992).
Adult bookstore has no right to protect the privacy rights of its customers in a public, commercial establishment. City News & Novelty v. City of Waukesha, 170 W (2d) 14, 487 NW (2d) 316 (Ct. App. 1992).
Defense of discriminatory prosecution requires showing prosecution is selective and intended to deny a constitutional right or motivated by the prosecutor's personal vindictiveness. Upon such a showing, the state has the burden of showing a reasonable basis for the classification. State v. Barman, 183 W (2d) 180, 515 NW (2d) 493 (Ct. App. 1994).
A nonlawyer may not sign and file a notice of appeal on behalf of a corporation. To do so constitutes practicing law without a license in violation of s. 757.30 and voids the appeal. Requiring a lawyer to represent a corporation in filing the notice does not violate constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. Jadair Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Co. 209 W (2d) 187, 561 NW (2d) 718 (1997).
Although counties may charge reasonable fees for the use of facilities in their county parks, they may not charge such fees only to out-of-state residents while allowing all Wisconsin residents to utilize such facilities free of charge simply because ORAP or ORAP-200 funds are involved. Such action would create an arbitrary and unreasonable distinction based on residence and unconstitutionally deny residents of other states equal protection of the laws. 60 Atty. Gen. 18.
Requirement that deputy sheriffs and police officers be citizens does not deny equal protection to resident aliens. 68 Atty. Gen. 61.
Classifications by gender must serve important government objectives and must be substantially related to achievement of those objectives. Orr v. Orr, 440 US 268 (1979).
Citizenship requirement for public teachers in New York did not violate equal protection. Ambach v. Norwick, 441 US 68 (1979).
Massachusetts civil service preference for veterans did not deny equal protection to women. Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney, 442 US 256 (1979).
Worker's compensation law that required men, but not women, to prove disability or dependence on deceased spouse's earnings violated equal protection. Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co. 446 US 142 (1980).
Racial classification did not violate equal protection clause. Fullilove v. Klutznick, 448 US 448 (1980).
Statutory rape law applicable only to males had "fair and substantial relationship" to legitimate state ends. Michael M. v. Sonoma County Superior Court, 450 US 464 (1981).
State university open only to women violated equal protection. Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, 458 US 718 (1982).
Layoff plan giving preference on basis of race to accomplish affirmative action goals wasn't sufficiently narrowly tailored and, therefore, violated equal protection. Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, 476 US 267 (1986).
There is no equal protection violation in a state classifying as nonresidents for tuition purposes persons who are residents for all other purposes. Lister v. Hoover, 655 F (2d) 123 (1981).
Postconviction detention of a person in county jail is a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment if it is occasioned by the prisoner's indigency. Taylor v. Gray, 375 F Supp. 790.
Contrast between percentage of black population of city, 17.2%, and percentage of black composition of "fixed wage" skilled craft positions available in city, 3.1%, evidenced a substantial disparity between proportion of minorities in general population and proportion in a specific job classification and was such as to establish a prima facie case of unlawful racial discrimination, absent a showing by city that statistical discrepancy resulted from causes other than racial discrimination. Crockett v. Grun, 388 F Supp. 912.
Civil rights actions against municipalities discussed. Starstead v. City of Superior, 533 F Supp. 1365 (1982).
Architectural Appearances Ordinances and the 1st Amendment. Rice. 76 MLR 439 (1992).
Hate Crimes: New Limits on the Scope of the 1st Amendment. Resler. 77 MLR 415 (1994).
Putative father's right to custody of his child. 1971 WLR 1262.
Zoning—Equal protection. 1976 WLR 234.
Equal protection—Sex discrimination. 1976 WLR 330.
DUE PROCESS
Although a person may invoke the Fifth amendment in a civil case in order to protect himself from the use of such evidence against him in a subsequent criminal action, if he does so an inference against his interest may be drawn as a matter of law based upon an implied admission that a truthful answer would tend to prove that the witness had committed the criminal act or might constitute a criminal act, and is not based upon the condition that the witness is seeking relief or ought not to receive relief because he has invoked the privilege. Molloy v. Molloy, 46 W (2d) 682, 176 NW (2d) 292.
Wisconsin can constitutionally tax the transfer of trust assets occurring as a result of the nonexercise of testatrix's limited power of appointment. Estate of Mueller, 47 W (2d) 336, 177 NW (2d) 60.
A school board's refusal to renew part of a teacher's contract which paid him for coaching basketball in addition to full-time teaching duties, without notice and hearing, does not violate his rights where no charge was made that reflected on him. Richards v. Board of Education, 58 W (2d) 444, 206 NW (2d) 597.
Property interest in employment conferred by state law is protected by the due-process provisions of both the state and federal constitutions. State ex rel. DeLuca v. Common Council, 72 W (2d) 672, 242 NW (2d) 689.
Due process standard in juvenile proceeding is fundamental fairness. Basic requirements discussed. In Interest of D.H. 76 W (2d) 286, 251 NW (2d) 196.
Permanent status public employe forfeits due process property interest in job by accepting inter-departmental promotion. DH&SS v. State Personnel Board, 84 W (2d) 675, 267 NW (2d) 644 (1978).
Where attorney is permitted to withdraw on day of trial without notice, due process requires granting a continuance. Sherman v. Heiser, 85 W (2d) 246, 270 NW (2d) 397 (1978).
Liberty interest in public employment discussed. Nufer v. Village Bd. of Village of Palmyra, 92 W (2d) 289, 284 NW (2d) 649 (1979).
Where city ordinance specified narrow grounds upon which civil service applicant may be screened out, applicant had no right to know grounds for screen-out. Taplick v. City of Madison Personnel Board, 97 W (2d) 162, 293 NW (2d) 173 (1980).
Provision which raised worker's compensation benefits retroactively was unconstitutional impairment of vested rights. State ex rel. Briggs & Stratton v. Noll, 100 W (2d) 650, 302 NW (2d) 487 (1981).
Due process rights of student at expulsion hearing discussed. Racine Unified School Dist. v. Thompson, 107 W (2d) 657, 321 NW (2d) 334 (Ct. App. 1982).
Due process was not violated where defendant was illegally arrested in asylum state and involuntarily brought to trial. State v. Monje, 109 W (2d) 138, 325 NW (2d) 695 (1982).
Due process rights of tenured professor who was alleged to have resigned were not protected by hearing to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation. Patterson v. University Board of Regents, 119 W (2d) 570, 350 NW (2d) 612 (1984).
Attributes of property interests protected by due process discussed. Waste Management of Wisconsin v. DNR, 128 W (2d) 59, 381 NW (2d) 318 (1986).
Due process rights of a probationer at a hearing to modify probation enumerated. State v. Hayes, 173 W (2d) 439, 496 NW (2d) 645 (Ct. App. 1992).
Tort of intentional denial of due process discussed. Old Tuckaway Assoc. v. City of Greenfield, 180 W (2d) 254, 509 NW (2d) 323 (Ct. App. 1993).
An inmate has a protected liberty interest in earned good-time credits and in not being placed in segregation. Post deprivation remedies provided by the state are adequate. Irby v. Macht, 184 W (2d) 831, 522 NW (2d) 9 (1994).
A property interest conferred by a statute subsequently amended to make an appointed governmental position at-will is terminated upon the conclusion of the appointing official's term of office. Unertl v. Dane County, 190 W (2d) 145, 526 NW (2d) 775 (Ct. App. 1994).
A procedural due process claim arises when there is a deprivation of a right without sufficient process. Generally a predeprivation hearing is required, but when a deprivation results form a random act of a state employe the question becomes the adequacy of postdeprivation remedies. Jones v. Dane County, 195 W (2d) 892, 537 NW (2d) 74 (Ct. App. 1995).
Substantive due process requires the state not to deprive its citizens of life, liberty and property without due process. Absent a special relationship, it does not impose an affirmative obligation upon the state to ensure the protection of those rights from a private actor, even when governmental aid may be necessary to secure a person's life, liberty or property. Jones v. Dane County, 195 W (2d) 892, 537 NW (2d) 74 (Ct. App. 1995).
The right to intrastate travel, including the right to move about one's neighborhood in an automobile, is fundamental, but infringements on the right are not subject to strict scrutiny. Cruising ordinances, reasonable in time, place and manner, do not violate this right. Brandmiller v. Arreola, 199 W (2d) 528, 544 NW (2d) 849 (1996).
Where a prisoner could not show that a period of segregated confinement which exceeded the time allowed by rule was not atypical of his prison life generally, there was no unconstitutional due process deprivation. The only time factor which courts will be concerned with in determining a procedural due process deprivation is the time the inmate is ultimately required to spend confined under the authority of the state. Chaney v. Renteria, 203 W (2d) 310, 554 NW (2d) 503 (Ct. App. 1996).
Foster children have a constitutional right under the Due Process Clause to safe and secure placement in a foster home. Whether a public official violated that right will be determined based on a professional judgment standard. Kara B. v. Dane County, 205 W (2d) 140, 555 NW (2d) 630 (1996).
An inmate has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in not having his mandatory release date extended. Due process is violated in a prison discipline case when guilt is found if there is not "some evidence" that supports the finding of guilt. Santiago v. Ware, 205 W (2d) 292, 556 NW (2d) 356 (Ct. App. 1996).
A nonlawyer may not sign and file a notice of appeal on behalf of a corporation. To do so constitutes practicing law without a license in violation of s. 757.30 and voids the appeal. Requiring a lawyer to represent a corporation in filing the notice does not violate constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. Jadair Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Co. 209 W (2d) 187, 561 NW (2d) 718 (1997).
Whether to proceed with civil litigation or to hold it in abeyance while a party is incarcerated depends on the nature of the case, the practical concerns raised by the prisoner's appearance and the alternative methods available to provide the prisoner with access to the hearing. Marriage of Schmidt v. Schmidt, 212 W (2d) 405, 569 NW (2d) 74 (Ct. App. 1997).
Prisoners' due process rights discussed. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 US 539.
Public high school students facing temporary suspension have property and liberty interests protected by due process. Goss v. Lopez, 419 US 565.
Garnishment of corporate bank accounts must comply with due process protections of Fuentes and Sniadach. North Georgia Finishing, Inc. v. Di-Chem, Inc. 419 US 601.
Wisconsin medical examining board does not deny due process by both investigating and adjudicating charge of professional misconduct. Withrow v. Larkin, 421 US 35.
States may deny benefits to those who fail to prove they did not quit job in order to obtain benefits. Lavine v. Milne, 424 US 577.
Due process does not disqualify agency as decision-maker merely because of familiarity with facts of case. Hortonville Dist. v. Hortonville Ed. Asso. 426 US 482.
Dismissal from medical school for academic deficiencies without hearing did not violate due process clause. Board of Curators, Univ. of Mo. v. Horowitz, 435 US 78 (1978).
Utility customers' due process rights were violated where utility shut off service for nonpayment without advising customers of available administrative procedure. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div. v. Craft, 436 US 1 (1978).
Father's acquiescence in daughter's desire to live with mother in California did not confer jurisdiction over father in California courts. Kulko v. California Superior Court, 436 US 84 (1978).
Due process clause was not violated when IRS monitored conversation with defendant in violation of IRS rules. United States v. Caceres, 440 US 741 (1979).
State may not exercise quasi in rem jurisdiction over defendant having no forum contacts by attacking contractual obligation of defendant's insurer licensed in state. Rush v. Savchuk, 444 US 320 (1980).
Involuntary transfer of prisoner to mental hospital implicated protected liberty interest. Vitek v. Jones, 445 US 480 (1980).
Termination of appointed assistant public defenders, who were neither policymakers nor confidential employes, solely on grounds of political affiliation was denial of first and fourteenth amendment rights. Branti v. Finkel, 445 US 507 (1980).
Segregation confinement of prisoner without prior hearing may violate due process if postponement of procedural protections is not justified by apprehended emergency conditions. Hughes v. Rowe, 449 US 5 (1980).
Where accident involving only Wisconsin residents occurred in Wisconsin, fact that decedent had been employed in Minnesota conferred jurisdiction on Minnesota court and Minnesota insurance law was applicable. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hague, 449 US 302 (1981).
National democratic party has protected right of political association and may not be compelled to seat delegates chosen in open primary in violation of party's rules. Democratic Party of U.S. v. Wisconsin, 450 US 107 (1981).
Statute which required putative father in paternity suit to pay for blood test denied due process to indigent putative fathers. Little v. Streater, 452 US 1 (1981).
Due process does not require appointment of counsel for indigent parents in every parental status termination proceeding. Lassiter v. Dept. of Social Services, 452 US 18 (1981).
Life prisoner had no due process right to statement of reasons why board did not commute life sentence. Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat, 452 US 458 (1981).
Ordinance regulating sale of drug paraphernalia was constitutional. Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, 455 US 489 (1982).
Revocation of probation for failure to pay fine, without determination that probationer had not made bona fide effort to pay or that alternate forms of punishment did not exist, denied due process and equal protection. Bearden v. Georgia, 461 US 660 (1983).
Notice by publication did not satisfy due process requirements in tax sale. Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, 462 US 791 (1983).
State's policy of preserving county boundaries in reapportionment plan justified population deviation averaging 13%. Brown v. Thomson, 462 US 835 (1983).
Discussion of minority set-aside program held to violate due process. Richmond v. Croson Co. 488 US 469, 102 LEd 2d 854 (1989).
