Court Opinion

ID: 9657070
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 20:12:15.268419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:40.435867
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(concurring). I
write to address a recurring issue faced by litigants and appellate courts: What is the standard of appellate review when the facts are uncontested and the decision turns on the legal effect of the facts? Stated another way, what is the standard of appellate review when the decision turns on the application of a legal standard to undisputed facts?
The boilerplate language, too often used by litigants and appellate courts, that application of a legal standard to undisputed facts is a question of law which an appellate court can decide independently without deference to the trial court, is, in my opinion, not necessarily correct in every instance. I conclude that the standard of appellate review depends on the nature of the issue involved. See Hennekens v. Hoerl, 160 Wis. 2d 144, 172, n.4, 465 N.W.2d 812 (1991) (Abrahamson, J., dissenting); Mucha v. King, 792 F.2d 602, 604-606 (7th Cir. 1986); Lee, Principled Decision Making and the Proper Role of Fed*836eral Appellate Courts: The Mixed Questions Conflict, 64 S. Calif. L. Rev. 235 (1991).