Practice News

The child sexual abuse scandal at Penn State University has caused other states to revisit their laws that aim to protect children from abuse. In Wisconsin, several changes to the mandatory-abuse reporting laws have taken place within the last month in order to provide more protection to children subject to abuse. One of the significant changes is that “school employees” are now mandatory reporters for child abuse. Previosuly, there were about 29 other occupations who were mandatory reporters including social workers, physicians, nurses, school teachers, administrators, and counselors. The requirement to report the abuse is mandatory if the person has reasonable cause to suspect the abuse or if the person has reason to believe the child has been threatened with abuse or neglect. There are some exceptions to the mandatory reporting including some exceptions for clergymen and parents. In addition, those who report in good faith as required may not be discharged from employment, or otherwise disciplined or discriminated agasint with respect to such report. As a “court appointed special advocate” for a child, lawyers are required to report the suspected child abuse. Penalties for failure to report the abuse is a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment of not more than six months or both. A civil case under tort law is also available for the victim and the family. This article is just a general overview of the law with regard to child abuse reporting as this area of the law is complicated and contains many caveats and exceptions. If you have any questions contact Greg Babcock at our office. Greg Babcock practices in the area of family law. Call or email him for a consultation.

For practicing attorneys, it is well known that in order to preserve your right to appeal a particualr issue, you must bring that issue to the attention to the circuit court. This is called the forfeiture rule. However, pro se litigants typically are not knowledgable about the proceedural aspects of the legal system and probably wouldn’t be aware of that fact. However, application of the forfeiture rule is no different for pro se litigants. In Townsend v. Massey, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found that one does not preserve legal arguments on appeal by simply raising a related issue at the trial court level, even if the person appealing is a pro se litigant. Because of this forfeiture rule, it is even more impotant to ensure that you have capable legal representation at the trial court and appeallate court levels. Contact our firm for assistance with all of your legal needs.

In the course of renting property occasionally people abandon property when they leave. As a landlord it is important to follow the statutorily outlined steps and get a storage lien placed on the items as quickly as possible. A landlord is allowed to charge “reasonable” storage fees to store the plaintiffs stuff assuming he gives the former owner notice. After some time, the landlord can take the items and sell them, recovering the reasonable storage fees and selling expenses. Any excess has to be remitted to either the previous owner or the state. When a lien is placed on the property, it has to be paid before the property can be recovered by its original owner. Placing a lien on the property gives you rights and options that allow you to start earning storage expenses you can recover against when the asset is disposed of. Our firm has extensive experience with liens and property rights. Contact Attorney David Daul or Warren Wanezek for a consultation.

When an employee gets injured on the job and takes time off to recover, an employer must rehire them unless there is reasonable cause not to do so. Wisconsin Statute 102.35 requires that an employer who refuses to rehire the employee, pay lost wages to the employee when they refuse to rehire them without a showing of reasonable cause.  In a case that was decided in July of 2011, the Wisconsin Supreme Court found that if a business could show a reasonable cause for termination than that was all they had to prove. The Wisconsin Supreme Court found that the LIRC had incorrectly read in the accommodation requirements for employees with disabilities because it asked for something more than reasonable cause.  The Supreme Court of Wisconsin found that the rehiring provision “does not contain a requirement that employers change their legitimate and universally applied business policies to meet the personal obligations of their employees.” Without a showing of reasonable cause the employer would have to pay. Employers and Employees get into disputes from time to time. Our Firm has extensive experience with employment disputes including return to work issues. Contact Attorney David Daul or Warren Wanezek for a consultation.

Social Media is a prominent part of many people’s lives these days.  With the advent of these technologies comes a lot of hidden risk. People tweet and post on Facebook about their personal experiences without filtering too much of it. Many people don’t realize that these posts and tweets can be used against them in pending litigation. While you may feel the compulsion to post or tweet about everything that happens to you, you should resist the urge when you get involved with something that could result in pending litigation. These tweets and posts can be viewed as party admissions and used as evidence against you. In this age of technology, social media is increasingly becoming a source of problems for people if they aren’t careful of what they post. With the ever increasing presence of social media in our lives, persons should exercise caution in what is posted on social media sites. 

                Conversion is the civil claim that may apply when people take property that does not belong to them.  It is committed when someone, without the consent of the owner takes, controls, destroys or materially alters the property in such a way that seriously interferes with the rights of the owner to control the property or fails to return something to someone who owns it. This deprivation can be permanent or for an indefinite period of time. It does not matter if the person who took it knew the owner was entitled to it or even that he intended to interfere with the owner’s possession as wrongful or unlawful intentions are not elements of conversion. It only matters that the person intended to deal with the property in a way that would interfere with the owner’s possession. Such disputes may arise in many contexts, including business disputes.  Our firm has extensive experience with tort litigation and property rights. Contact Attorney David Daul or Warren Wanezek for a consultation.

The Americans with Disabilities Act, Title III provides that public accommodations be accessible to Americans with disabilities. Title III covers businesses and nonprofit service providers that are generally accessible to the public. Businesses cannot discriminate through exclusion, segregation and unequal treatment. They buildings must be in code with architectural standards and must remove barriers in existing buildings when it is reasonable. The act covers both physical and mental disabilities, but requires documentation of them. It is unfortunate that discrimination occurs in today’s society. Our firm has extensive experience in resolving these disputes. In some instances relief through the Department of Justice can be obtained through an administrative complaint.  However in more complex matters you may wish to file a law suit in Federal Court alleging a violation of the law.  Attorneys usually work on a contingency fee arrangement, allowing the claimant to pursue these actions.  Attorney David D. Daul handles these claims and would be happy to provide you with a free consultation. 

Ask a Question

Wisconsin’s Fair Employment Act protects people with felony conviction from employment discrimination. This protection is available only under state law as there is no federal equivalent. Employers are not allowed to discriminate based on past convictions or charges unless it “substantially relates to the job.”  The substantial relationship is determined by comparing the circumstances surrounding the crime with the circumstances surrounding the job. If a felon convicted of embezzlement applied for an accounting position, it is likely that there would be a finding that the two positions are “substantially related.”  However if that same felon applied for a job as a cook, there is little basis to claim the conviction is “substantially related” to the job.  The healthcare industry has some additional requirements when it comes to employment as some offenses are automatically considered to be related under the Wisconsin Caregiver Law. When it comes to discrimination cases, the more documentation you have the better. Employers sometimes violate the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act by discriminating against those with criminal convictions or pending charges. Our firm has extensive experience in resolving these claims. Contact Attorney David D. Daul for a consultation.

Ask a Question