Michael S. Polsky v. Daniel E. Virnich
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2011 WI 13 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: COMPLETE TITLE: OF WISCONSIN 2007AP203 Michael S. Polsky as receiver for Communications Products Corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent-Cross-AppellantPetitioner, v. Daniel E. Virnich and Jack M. Moores, Defendants-Appellants-CrossRespondents. REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS 2010 WI App 20 Reported at 323 Wis. 2d 811, 779 N.W.2d 712 (Ct. App. 2010 Published) OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: March 2, 2011 February 3, 2011 SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: Circuit Grant Michael Kirchman JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ZIEGLER, J. did not participate. ATTORNEYS: For the plaintiff-respondent-cross-appellant-petitioner there were briefs by Robert J. Kasieta, Andrew J. Parrish and Kasieta Legal Group, LLC, Madison, and oral argument by Robert J. Kasieta. For the defendants-appellants-cross-respondents there were briefs by Donald K. Schott, Valerie L. Bailey-Rihn, James Richgels, Freya K. Bowen, Elyce M. Wos and Quarles & Brady LLP, Madison and Jeffrey O. Davis and Quarles & Brady LLP, Milwaukee, and oral argument by Donald K. Schott. Amicus curiae briefs were filed by John E. Knight, James E. Bartzen, Kirsten E. Spira and Boardman, Suhr, Curry & Field LLP, Madison, on behalf of the Wisconsin Bankers Association. An amicus curiae brief was filed by William Haus and Haus, Roman and Banks, LLP, Madison, on behalf of the Sheet Metal Workers Local #565, affiliated with Sheet Metal Workers International Association, AFL-CIO. 2 2011 WI 13 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2007AP203 (L.C. No. 2004CV285) STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT Michael S. Polsky as receiver for Communications Products Corporation, FILED Plaintiff-Respondent-Cross-AppellantPetitioner, MAR 2, 2011 v. A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Supreme Court Daniel E. Virnich and Jack M. Moores, Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Respondents. REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. ¶1 PER CURIAM. The court is equally Affirmed. divided on the question of whether the decision of the court of appeals, Polsky v. Virnich, 2010 WI App 20, 323 Wis. 2d 811, 779 N.W.2d 712, should be Justice GABLEMAN affirmed PATIENCE would or DRAKE affirm; reversed. ROGGENSACK Chief Justice and Justice DAVID Justice SHIRLEY S. T. PROSSER, MICHAEL J. ABRAHAMSON, Justice ANN WALSH BRADLEY and Justice N. PATRICK CROOKS would reverse. ¶2 affirmed. Justice ANNETTE K. ZIEGLER did not participate. Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is No. 1 2007AP203
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
