Gerald F. Weiland v. Daniel G. Paulin
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2003 WI 27 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: OF WISCONSIN 02-0826 COMPLETE TITLE: Gerald F. Weiland and Carol Ann Weiland, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Daniel G. Paulin and Joan E. Paulin, Defendants-Appellants. REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS 2002 WI App 311 Reported at: ___ Wis. 2d ___, 655 N.W.2d 204 (Ct. App. 2002-Published) OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: April 24, 2003 2003 WI 27 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN NOTICE This order is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 02-0826 Gerald F. Weiland and Carol Ann Weiland, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Daniel G. Paulin and Joan E. Paulin, FILED APR 24, 2003 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court Madison, WI Defendants-Appellants. The Court entered the following order on this date: Upon consideration of the petition for review filed in this matter by Attorney Joseph J. Kroening challenging that portion of the court of appeals November 13, 2002 decision that, on the court s own motion, declared that the appeal Attorney Kroening filed on behalf of the defendants-appellants-petitioners, Daniel and Joan Paulin, was frivolous under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.25(3)(c)2 and directed that costs and fees for the frivolous appeal be assessed solely against Attorney Kroening, IT IS ORDERED the petition for review is granted and that part of the court of appeals decision declaring the appeal to be frivolous is summarily reversed and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals with directions that: (1) the court of appeals shall give Attorney Kroening an opportunity to be heard regarding the frivolous appeal determination, and (2) the court of appeals shall then make specific findings to support any conclusion that the appeal is frivolous under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.25(3)(c)2. No. 02-0826 2
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.
