Case Title: Steven H. Hoyme v. Janice S. Brakken

Citation: 2004 WI 26

Docket Number: 2002AP001790

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2004-03-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
2004 WI 26 
 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
02-1790 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
Steven H. Hoyme, 
          Petitioner-Respondent, 
 
     v. 
 
Janice S. Brakken,  
          Respondent-Appellant-Petitioner. 
 
 
 
REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS 
Reported at: 266 Wis. 2d 1060, 668 N.W.2d 562 
(Ct. App. 2003-Unpublished) 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
March 25, 2004   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
March 10, 2004   
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
Circuit   
 
COUNTY: 
Marinette   
 
JUDGE: 
David G. Miron   
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING: SYKES, J., did not participate.   
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
For the respondent-appellant-petitioner there were briefs 
by Donald R. Fraker and Fraker Law Firm, S.C., Mequon, and oral 
argument by Donald R. Fraker. 
 
For the petitioner-respondent there was a brief by Janis M. 
Burgess and Wesley W. Hoffman & Associates, P.C., Menominee, MI, 
and oral argument by Janis M. Burgess. 
 
 
2004 WI 26 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  02-1790   
(L.C. No. 
00 CV 205) 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
Steven H. Hoyme,  
 
          Petitioner-Respondent, 
 
     v. 
 
Janice S. Brakken,  
 
          Respondent-Appellant-Petitioner. 
 
FILED 
 
MAR 25, 2004 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals.  Affirmed.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   The court is equally divided on the 
question of whether the decision of the court of appeals, Hoyme 
v. Brakken, No. 02-1790, unpublished slip op. (Wis. Ct. App. 
July 22, 2003), should be affirmed or reversed.  Justice JON P. 
WILCOX, Justice N. PATRICK CROOKS, and Justice DAVID T. PROSSER 
would affirm; Chief Justice SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, Justice ANN 
WALSH BRADLEY, and Justice PATIENCE D. ROGGENSACK would reverse.  
Justice DIANE S. SYKES did not participate. 
¶2 
Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is 
affirmed. 
 
No. 
   
 
2 
 
 
No. 
   
 
 
 
1