reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
WI Stat § 885.285 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.285 - Settlement and advance payment of claim for damages.

885.285  Settlement and advance payment of claim for damages. (1) No admission of liability shall be inferred from the following:(a) A settlement with or any payment made to an injured person, or to another on behalf of any injured person, or any person entitled to recover damages on account of injury or death of such person; or(b) A settlement with or any payment made to a person or on the person's behalf to another for injury to or destruction of property. (2) Any settlement or payment under sub. (1) is not admissible in any legal action unless pleaded as a defense. (3) Any settlement or advance payment under sub. (1) shall be credited against any final settlement or judgment between the parties. Upon motion to the court in the absence of the jury and on submission of proper proof prior to entry of judgment on a verdict, the court shall apply the provisions of s. 895.045 and then shall reduce the amount of the damages so determined by the amount of the payments made. Any rights of contribution between joint tort-feasors shall be determined on the amount of the verdict prior to reduction because of a settlement or advance payment. (4) The period fixed for the limitation for the commencement of actions shall be as provided by s. 893.12.History:  1975 c. 327, 421; 1979 c. 323.A property payment under sub. (1) extends the limitation under s. 893.12, but only if made within the three-year limit of s. 893.54 (1). Abraham v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co., 115 Wis. 2d 678, 341 N.W.2d 414 (Ct. App. 1983).To be a payment under this section that will toll or extend the statute of limitations, a payment must be related to fault or liability. Gurney v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co., 188 Wis. 2d 68, 523 N.W.2d 193 (Ct. App. 1994).The waiver by the defendant medical provider in a medical malpractice action of the copayment portion of the amount due for the plaintiff's medical treatment did not constitute a payment under this section or s. 893.12. Young v. Aurora Medical Center, 2004 WI App 71, 272 Wis. 2d 300, 679 N.W.2d 549, 03-0224.
WI Stat § 885.365 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.365 - Recorded telephone conversation.

885.365  Recorded telephone conversation. (1) Evidence obtained as the result of the use of voice recording equipment for recording of telephone conversations, by way of interception of a communication or in any other manner, shall be totally inadmissible in the courts of this state in civil actions, except as provided in ss. 968.28 to 968.37. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply where:(a) Such recording is made in a manner other than by interception and the person whose conversation is being recorded is informed at that time that the conversation is being recorded and that any evidence thereby obtained may be used in a court of law; or such recording is made through a recorder connector provided by the telecommunications utility as defined in s. 196.01 (10) or a telecommunications carrier as defined in s. 196.01 (8m) in accordance with its tariffs and which automatically produces a distinctive recorder tone that is repeated at intervals of approximately 15 seconds;(b) The recording is made by a telecommunications utility as defined in s. 196.01 (10), a telecommunications carrier as defined in s. 196.01 (8m) or its officers or employees for the purpose of or incident to the construction, maintenance, conduct or operation of the services and facilities of such public utilities, or to the normal use by such public utilities of the services and facilities furnished to the public by such public utility; or(c) The recording is made by a fire department or law enforcement agency to determine violations of, and in the enforcement of, s. 941.13.History:  1971 c. 40 s. 93; 1977 c. 173 s. 168; 1985 a. 297; 1987 a. 399; 1993 a. 496.
WI Stat § 885.40 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.40 - Applicability.

885.40  Applicability. Sections 885.40 to 885.47 apply to all trial courts of record in this state in the receipt and utilization of testimony and other evidence recorded on videotape and to the review of cases on appeal where the record on appeal contains testimony or other evidence recorded on videotape. These sections are not intended to preclude or limit the presentation of evidence by other technical procedures.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d vii (1975).Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: The contents of these rules are not meant to exclude present practice whereby movies and photographs are introduced into evidence in appropriate situations. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]Sections 885.40 to 885.47 did not apply to police videotape of a drunk driver. State v. Haefer, 110 Wis. 2d 381, 328 N.W.2d 894 (Ct. App. 1982).Legal Applications of Videotape. Benowitz. WBB June 1974.
WI Stat § 885.41 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.41 - Definitions.

885.41  Definitions. (1) Videotaping. Videotaping is a visual or simultaneous audiovisual electronic recording. (2)  Operator. Operator means a person trained to operate video equipment and may be an official qualified under s. 804.03.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d vii (1975); 1987 a. 403.Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: The definition of videotaping recognizes that videotaping can be used for visual purposes with no audio recording present. The definition of operator recognizes that an operator of videotape equipment could be the same individual before whom depositions can presently be taken as authorized by s. 804.03. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]
WI Stat § 885.42 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.42 - When available.

885.42  When available. (1) Depositions. Any deposition may be recorded by audiovisual videotape without a stenographic transcript. Any party to the action may arrange at the party's expense to have a simultaneous stenographic record made. Except as provided by ss. 885.40 to 885.47, ch. 804 governing the practice and procedure in depositions and discovery shall apply. (2)  Other evidence. Such other evidence as is appropriate may be recorded by videotape and be presented at a trial. The court may direct a party or the court reporter to prepare a transcript of an audio or audiovisual recording presented under this subsection in accordance with SCR 71.01 (2) (e). (3)  Entire trial testimony and evidence. All trial proceedings, including evidence in its entirety, may be presented at a trial by videotape upon the approval of all parties and the trial judge. In determining whether to approve a videotape trial, the trial judge, after consultation with counsel, shall consider the cost involved, the nature of the action, and the nature and amount of testimony. The trial judge shall fix a date prior to the date of trial when all recorded testimony must be filed with the clerk of court. (4)  Trial record. At trial, videotape depositions shall be reported unless accompanied with a certified transcript submitted in accordance with SCR 71.01 (2) (d).History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, xii (1975); 1975 c. 218; 1987 a. 403; Sup. Ct. Order No. 10-06, 2010 WI 128, 329 Wis. 2d xxvii.Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: Sub. (1). The definition of depositions is meant to include adverse examinations prior to trial.Sub. (2). This subsection anticipates that certain other evidence, such as the scene of an accident or the lifestyle of an accident victim, may be presented at trial by means of videotape. This provision would also allow the majority of a trial to be conducted by means of videotape.Sub. (3). This subsection would authorize an entire videotape trial in Wisconsin. Such a trial could only occur upon the approval of all parties and the presiding judge. Appropriate safeguards are included to ensure that this provision would be used only when clearly appropriate. Procedure for a videotape trial is subject to agreement among the parties and the court.Sub. (4). This subsection establishes that matters presented by videotape at trial are made a part of the trial record in anticipation of a possible appeal. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]
WI Stat § 885.43 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.43 - Notice of videotape deposition.

885.43  Notice of videotape deposition. Every notice for the taking of a videotape deposition and subpoena for attendance at such deposition shall state that the deposition is to be visually recorded and preserved pursuant to the provisions of ss. 885.44 and 885.46.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, xii (1975); Sup. Ct. Order, 141 Wis. 2d xxxv (1987).Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: This provision recognizes that there should be adequate notice that a deposition by videotape is to be taken. The section requires that the notice make reference to the provisions on filing and preserving of videotape depositions. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]Judicial Council Note, 1988. Videotape depositions are no longer required to be filed in court. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1988]
WI Stat § 885.45 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.45 - Videotape costs; depositions and trials.

885.45  Videotape costs; depositions and trials. (1) The expense of videotape as a material shall be borne by the proponent. (2) The reasonable expense of recording testimony on videotape shall be costs in the action. (3) The expense of playing the videotape recording at trial shall be borne by the proponent of the testimony. If the proponent is entitled to costs, the expense under this subsection shall be costs in the action, not to exceed for each witness or expert witness the maximum allowable cost for witness fees under ss. 814.04 (2) and 814.67 (1) (b) and (c). (4) The expense of an audio reproduction of the videotape recording sound track used by the court in ruling on objections shall be costs in the action. (5) The expense of playing the videotape recording for the purpose of ruling upon objections shall be borne by one or more parties as apportioned by the court in an equitable manner. If the party bearing the expense is entitled to costs, the expense under this subsection shall be costs in the action in an amount determined by the court. (6) The expense of producing the edited version of the videotape recording shall be costs in the action, provided that the expense of the videotape, as a material, shall be borne by the proponent of the testimony. (7) The expense of a copy of the videotape recording and the expense of an audiotape recording of the videotape sound track shall be borne by the party requesting the copy.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d vii (1975); 1983 a. 256.Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: This provision sets out the application of costs in the use of videotape procedure. Costs are allocated in an equitable manner between the proponent and the court or are considered costs in the action. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]
WI Stat § 885.46 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.46 - Videotape custody and preservation.

885.46  Videotape custody and preservation. The official shall maintain secure and proper storage of the original videotape recording and any edited videotape recording until: (1) The final disposition of the cause where no trial is had; (2) The expiration of the appeal period following trial, provided no appeal is taken; (3) The final determination of the cause if an appeal is taken.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, vii (1975); Sup. Ct. Order, 141 Wis. 2d xxxv (1987).Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: Sub. (1). One of the advantages of videotape is its possible reuse in other legal proceedings but the proponent of any videotape testimony retains the responsibility for submitting a recording of sufficient quality.Sub. (2). Release of videotape recordings may be done only by order of the court. Such release may only occur after completion of the proceeding for which the videotape has been used. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]
WI Stat § 885.47 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.47 - Videotape playback equipment.

885.47  Videotape playback equipment. (1) Playback equipment. Each court may establish rules providing for the availability of playback or reproducing equipment. Such rules shall provide for an adequately trained operator. Minimum playback equipment shall be a videotape player of a commonly available type and one monitor having at least a 14 inch diagonal screen. Color equipment is not required. If a party uses videotape which is not compatible with the available playback equipment, the party shall furnish playback equipment or convert the videotape to a format compatible with the available playback equipment at the party's expense, which shall not be chargeable as costs.History:  Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d xiii (1975); 1975 c. 218; Sup. Ct. Order, 101 Wis. 2d xi (1981); Sup. Ct. Order, 141 Wis. 2d xxxv (1987).Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1975: Sub. (2) [(1)]. Each court in Wisconsin is encouraged to establish rules for making available videotape playback or reproducing equipment. Such availability could be secured through purchase, leasing, rental, or borrowing from another court. Each court establishing such rules must provide for a trained videotape operator. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1976]
WI Stat § 885.50 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.50 - Statement of intent.

885.50  Statement of intent. (1) It is the intent of the Supreme Court that videoconferencing technology be available for use in the circuit courts of Wisconsin to the greatest extent possible consistent with the limitations of the technology, the rights of litigants and other participants in matters before the courts, and the need to preserve the fairness, dignity, solemnity, and decorum of court proceedings. Further, it is the intent of the Supreme Court that circuit court judges be vested with the discretion to determine the manner and extent of the use of videoconferencing technology, except as specifically set forth in this subchapter. (2) In declaring this intent, the Supreme Court finds that careful use of this evolving technology can make proceedings in the circuit courts more efficient and less expensive to the public and the participants without compromising the fairness, dignity, solemnity, and decorum of these proceedings. The Supreme Court further finds that an open-ended approach to the incorporation of this technology into the court system under the supervision and control of judges, subject to the limitations and guidance set forth in this subchapter, will most rapidly realize the benefits of videoconferencing for all concerned. (3) In declaring this intent, the Supreme Court further finds that improper use of videoconferencing technology, or use in situations in which the technical and operational standards set forth in this subchapter are not met, can result in abridgement of fundamental rights of litigants, crime victims, and the public, unfair shifting of costs, and loss of the fairness, dignity, solemnity, and decorum of court proceedings that is essential to the proper administration of justice.History:  Sup. Ct. Order No. 07-12, 2008 WI 37, 305 Wis. 2d xli.Comment, 2008: Section 885.50 is intended to recognize and summarize the larger debate concerning the use of videoconferencing technology in the courts, and to provide a clear statement of the Supreme Court's intent concerning such use, which should be helpful guidance to litigants, counsel and circuit and appellate courts in interpreting and applying these rules.This subchapter is not intended to give circuit court judges the authority to compel county boards to acquire, maintain or replace videoconferencing equipment. Rather, it is intended to provide courts with authority and guidance in the use of whatever videoconferencing equipment might be made available to them.Bridging the Distance: Videoconferencing in Wisconsin Circuit Courts. Leineweber. Wis. Law. July 2008.
WI Stat § 885.52 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.52 - Definitions.

885.52  Definitions. In this subchapter: (1) “Circuit court" includes proceedings before circuit court judges and commissioners, and all references to circuit court judges include circuit court commissioners. (2) “Participants" includes litigants, counsel, witnesses while on the stand, judges, and essential court staff, but excludes other interested persons and the public at large. (3) “Videoconferencing" means an interactive technology that sends video, voice, and data signals over a transmission circuit so that two or more individuals or groups can communicate with each other simultaneously using video monitors.History:  Sup. Ct. Order No. 07-12, 2008 WI 37, 305 Wis. 2d xli.
WI Stat § 885.54 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.54 - Technical and operational standards.

885.54  Technical and operational standards. (1) Videoconferencing technology used in circuit court proceedings shall meet the following technical and operational standards:(a) Participants shall be able to see, hear, and communicate with each other.(b) Participants shall be able to see, hear, and otherwise observe any physical evidence or exhibits presented during the proceeding.(c) Video and sound quality shall be adequate to allow participants to observe the demeanor and non-verbal communications of other participants and to clearly hear what is taking place in the courtroom to the same extent as if they were present in the courtroom.(d) Parties and counsel at remote locations shall be able, upon request, to have the courtroom cameras scan the courtroom so that remote participants may observe other persons present and activities taking place in the courtroom during the proceedings.(e) In matters set out in par. (g), counsel for a defendant or respondent shall have the option to be physically present with the client at the remote location, and the facilities at the remote location shall be able to accommodate counsel's participation in the proceeding from such location. Parties and counsel at remote locations shall be able to mute the microphone system at that location so that there can be private, confidential communication between them.(f) If applicable, there shall be a means by which documents can be transmitted between the courtroom and the remote location.(g) In criminal matters, and in proceedings under chs. 48, 51, 55, 938, and 980, if not in each other's physical presence, a separate private voice communication facility shall be available so that the defendant or respondent and his or her attorney are able to communicate privately during the entire proceeding.(h) The proceeding at the location from which the judge is presiding shall be visible and audible to the jury and the public, including crime victims, to the same extent as the proceeding would be if not conducted by videoconferencing. (2) The moving party, including the circuit court, shall certify that the technical and operational standards at the court and the remote location are in compliance with the requirements of sub. (1).History:  Sup. Ct. Order No. 07-12, 2008 WI 37, 305 Wis. 2d xli; Sup. Ct. Order No. 08-21, 2008 WI 111, filed 7-30-08.Comment, 2008:  Section 885.54 is intended to establish stringent technical and operational standards for the use of videoconferencing technology over objection, and in considering approval by the circuit court of waivers or stipulations under s. 885.62. Mobile cart-based systems will not meet these standards in many or even most situations, but may still be used pursuant to a waiver or stipulation approved by the court. The effect will be to encourage the installation of multiple camera systems, while still allowing the use of cart-based systems when participants are in agreement to do so, which is likely to be much of the time.
WI Stat § 885.58 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.58 - Use in civil cases and special proceedings.

885.58  Use in civil cases and special proceedings. (1) Subject to the standards and criteria set forth in ss. 885.54 and 885.56 and to the limitations of sub. (2), a circuit court may, on its own motion or at the request of any party, in any civil case or special proceeding permit the use of videoconferencing technology in any pre-trial, trial, or post-trial hearing. (2) (a) A proponent of a witness via videoconferencing technology at any evidentiary hearing or trial shall file a notice of intention to present testimony by videoconference technology 30 days prior to the scheduled start of the proceeding. Any other party may file an objection to the testimony of a witness by videoconferencing technology within 10 days of the filing of the notice of intention. If the time limits of the proceeding do not permit the time periods provided for in this paragraph, the court may in its discretion shorten the time to file notice of intention and objection.(b) The court shall determine the objection in the exercise of its discretion under the criteria set forth in s. 885.56.History:  Sup. Ct. Order No. 07-12, 2008 WI 37, 305 Wis. 2d xli.Comment, 2008:  Regarding section 885.58, civil cases and special proceedings in general pose few problems of constitutional dimension concerning the use of videoconferencing technology and offer litigants the potential of significant savings in trial expenses. For these reasons, this technology will likely gain rapid acceptance resulting in expanding use. Where objections are raised, the rule provides that the circuit court will resolve the issue pursuant to the standards and decisional guidance set out in ss. 885.54 and 885.56.
WI Stat § 885.62 (2021)
2021 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations|Chapter 885 - Witnesses and oral testimony.|885.62 - Waivers and stipulations.

885.62  Waivers and stipulations. Parties to circuit court proceedings may waive the technical and operational standards provided in this subchapter, or may stipulate to any different or modified procedure, as may be approved by the court.History:  Sup. Ct. Order No. 07-12, 2008 WI 37, 305 Wis. 2d xli.Comment, 2008:  The intent of s. 885.62 is to permit litigants to take advantage of videoconferencing technology in any matter before the court regardless of whether the provisions of this subchapter would otherwise permit such use, as long as the parties are in agreement to do so and the circuit court approves. This should help to encourage innovation and experimentation in the use of videoconferencing technology, and thereby promote the most rapid realization of its benefits, while preserving to the litigants and ultimately to the courts the ability to prevent abuses and loss of the fairness, dignity, solemnity and decorum of court proceedings.