Court Opinion

ID: 9688670
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:00:02.210275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:41.073541
License: Public Domain

Broadfoot, J.
(dissenting). I am unable to agree with the majority of the court in this case. This court in the past has not been consistent in determining what changes an intended special appearance into a general appearance. To reach the decision in the present case the majority have adopted a most rigid, harsh, and narrow construction of what has been said in earlier cases. In my opinion this practically abolishes special appearances in Wisconsin. It seems to me that where some statement is made that is incidental to and consistent with the relief sought by the special appearance it *25can still be called a special appearance where the intention so to do is apparent. We of the minority are encouraged by the majority’s intimation that a workable rule might be established under our authority to make rules governing procedure and practice, and will be happy to join in accomplishing such a result.
I am authorized to state that Mr. Chief Justice Fairchild and Mr. Justice Currie join in this dissent.