Court Opinion

ID: 9657270
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 20:18:29.031941+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:42.628771
License: Public Domain

SUNDBY, J.
(dissenting). For the reasons stated in my dissent in C.L. v. Olson, 140 Wis. 2d 224, 241-47, 409 N.W.2d 156, 163-165 (Ct. App. 1987) aff’d, 143 Wis. 2d 701, 422 N.W.2d 614 (1988), I dissent from that part of the majority opinion which holds that we may not consider Harmann’s affidavits in determining whether the defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Our summary judgment methodology is contrary to sec. 802.08(2), Stats., and is a regression to specification pleading.