APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: THOMAS P. DONEGAN, Judge. Affirmed.



Similar documents
IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED September 24, Appeal No DISTRICT I JOHN C. HAGEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, DEFENDANT.

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED September 4, Appeal No DISTRICT II MEQUON MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED December 9, Appeal No FT DISTRICT IV ATLANTA CASUALTY COMPANIES, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED July 14, Appeal No. 2014AP1151 DISTRICT I MICHAEL L. ROBINSON, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED

APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: MICHAEL GUOLEE, Judge. Affirmed.

2012 WI APP 87 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

2015 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

Before Hoover, P.J., Peterson and Brunner, JJ.

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A Court of Appeals Anderson, J.

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT. THIS MATTER comes on for consideration of DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED November 20, Appeal No DISTRICT II CROSSMARK, INC., PLAINTIFF,

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014).

PUBLISHED OPINION. Case No.: Petition for Review Dismissed. For Complete Title of Case, see attached opinion

NOTICE IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED. March 5, No RYAN TENNESSEN, DANIEL TENNESSEN and DARLENE TENNESSEN,

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. Brown, P.J., Nettesheim and Anderson, JJ.

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED September 25, Appeal No DISTRICT IV

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED February 24, Appeal No. 2014AP657 DISTRICT I HUPY & ABRAHAM, S.C.,

DISTRICT II/I. Farm issued to Lenci did not provide uninsured motorist coverage for an accident he had while

2009 WI APP 51 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

DISTRICT I. provide uninsured motorist coverage for an accident he had while driving his motorcycle. Based

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A Robert Meeker, et al., Appellants, vs. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company, Respondent.

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED August 2, Appeal No. 2004AP1468 DISTRICT I IRA BANKS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED July 16, Appeal No. 2014AP157 DISTRICT IV DENNIS D. DUFOUR, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT-CROSS-RESPONDENT,

Watson v. Price NO. COA (Filed 19 April 2011) Medical Malpractice Rule 9(j) order extending statute of limitations not effective not filed

How To Get A Court To Dismiss A Spoliation Of Evidence Claim In Illinois

Boyd v. Sandling NO. COA (Filed 15 March 2011) Negligence personal injury sufficiency of service of process statute of limitations

Recent Case Update VOL. XXIII, NO. 2 Summer 2014

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED May 8, Appeal No. 2005AP1653 DISTRICT III DUSTIN R. ELBING, PLAINTIFF,

2015 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE

Workers' Compensation Commission Division Filed: June 19, No WC

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2008).

1 VERGERONT, J. 1 Daniel Stormer was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, third offense, contrary to WIS. STAT.

Recent Case Update. Insurance Stacking UIM Westra v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (Court of Appeals, 13 AP 48, June 18, 2013)

APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Winnebago County: ROBERT HAWLEY, Judge. Affirmed.

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012).

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL KNOXVILLE, MARCH 1996 SESSION

2014 WI APP 75 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

2015 IL App (5th) U NO IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT

Illinois Official Reports

2013 IL App (3d) U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013

No WC IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION DIVISION

How To Sue Allstate Insurance Company

2013 IL App (5th) WC-U NO WC IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Shannon Rivers : Present: Williams, C.J., Flanders, Goldberg, Flaherty, and Suttell, JJ. O P I N I O N

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON March 11, 2015 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 6, 2010 Session

APPEAL from judgments and an order of the circuit court for Green Lake County: WILLIAM M. McMONIGAL, Judge. Affirmed.

Reed Armstrong Quarterly

2012 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

RENDERED: DECEMBER 20, 2002; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED NO CA MR OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** **

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellant : C.A. CASE NO CA 53. v. : T.C. NO. 07CV213

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION PHYLLIS M. LANDIS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF EDWARD E.

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: JEFFREY A. WAGNER, Judge. Affirmed. Before Curley, P.J., Wedemeyer and Kessler, JJ.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 6:11-cv GKS-GJK.

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

FILED December 15, 2015 Carla Bender 4 th District Appellate Court, IL

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JAMES MICHAEL WATSON DEBTOR CHAPTER 7

COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Benny HAWKINS and Claudia Hawkins v. HERITAGE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division III Opinion delivered September 9, 1998

Illinois Official Reports

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK John C. Morrison, Jr., Judge. In this appeal, we consider whether an exclusion in an

Before Cane, C.J., Hoover, P.J., and Peterson, J.

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 April 2013

2014 IL App (1st) No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Nos , , cons. Order filed February 18, 2011 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 01-CV-810. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CA )

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY

No. 62 February 13, IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON. Scott HUGHES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION

Case 1:09-cv JAW Document 165 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2495 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. In re Chapter 13

Transcription:

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 15, 2000 Cornelia G. Clark Acting Clerk, Court of Appeals of Wisconsin NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See WIS. STAT. 808.10 and RULE 809.62. No. 99-0561 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I MARGARET HOVEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: THOMAS P. DONEGAN, Judge. Affirmed. 1 CURLEY, J. 1 Margaret Hovey appeals the order dismissing her small claims action. She contends that the trial court erred in determining that the statute of limitations had expired when she filed her action with the court. She submits that her action was commenced on the date she served Allstate Insurance 1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. 752.31(2).

Company (Allstate) with a copy of the summons and complaint, not the date the summons and complaint were filed with the court. Thus, she argues that the statute of limitations was tolled when she served Allstate. Because an action is not commenced until the summons and complaint are filed with the court, this court affirms. I. BACKGROUND. 2 Hovey was involved in an automobile accident with Martha Chicanick on October 2, 1995. At the time of the accident, Chicanick was insured by Allstate. Hovey brought a small claims suit seeking reimbursement for her medical care, alleging that she was injured in the accident as a result of Chicanick s negligence. Her attorney served a small claims summons and complaint on Allstate on October 1, 1998. Her attorney then filed the summons and complaint with the Milwaukee Circuit Court clerk on October 8, 1998, and was given October 26, 1998, as the return date for the action. On October 26, 1998, Hovey s attorney did not arrive in the courtroom until after the case had been called and dismissed. Her attorney then brought a motion to reopen and obtained a hearing date. At the hearing, Allstate opposed the motion to reopen, arguing that the statute of limitations had run prior to Hovey s filing the action, and thus, her suit was barred. The trial court agreed and this appeal follows. II. ANALYSIS. 3 Hovey concedes that the three-year statute of limitations found in WIS. STAT. 893.54 governs this small claims action and, as a result, the statute of limitations expired on October 2, 1998. Further, Hovey acknowledges that the summons and complaint were served on Allstate the day before the statute expired, but the documents were not filed with the court until October 8, 1998. 2

Hovey contends that the trial court s ruling that Hovey was obligated to file the summons and complaint with the court before the statute of limitation expiration date was in error. Hovey submits that the trial court s interpretation of the relevant statutory authority and case law results in a shortened statute of limitations for small claims actions, and that this result was not intended by the legislature. 4 Here, the disputed issue centers on an interpretation of the relevant statutes. The meaning of a statute is a question of law and this court is not bound by the trial court s conclusion. See City of Mequon v. Hess, 158 Wis. 2d 500, 505, 463 N.W.2d 687 (Ct. App. 1990). Further, it is the duty of this court, when statutes relate to the same subject matter, to construe them together and to harmonize them, if possible. See Aiello v. Village of Pleasant Prairie, 206 Wis. 2d 68, 73, 556 N.W.2d 697 (1996). 5 The general rule concerning when an action is commenced can be found in WIS. STAT. 893.02. It states that an action is commenced when the summons naming the defendant and the complaint are filed with the court. WISCONSIN STAT. 801.02 governs the commencement of suits in civil cases. Section 801.02(1) states that [a] civil action in which a personal judgment is sought is commenced as to any defendant when a summons and a complaint naming the person as defendant are filed with the court, provided service of an authenticated copy of the summons and of the complaint is made upon the defendant under this chapter within 90 days after filing. 6 Hovey s position, that she commenced her suit when she served Allstate with a copy of the summons and complaint, is predicated on her interpretation of the procedure in effect in small claims court at the time of her 3

suit. The procedure then in effect permitted Hovey to serve the defendant with the summons and complaint before the action was filed with the court. Hovey extrapolates from this fact that, as a result, her suit was commenced at the time the service was effectuated, and not, as the trial court found, at the later date when the summons and complaint were filed with the court. This court remains unpersuaded by Hovey s argument. 7 First, it should be noted that the procedure in the Milwaukee small claims court has been changed since Hovey brought her action. The rule in effect at the time of her suit, WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT RULE 390 (1997), 2 read: SERVICE OF SUMMONS. Service of summons in small claims actions shall be made pursuant to Sec. 799.12, Wis. Stats., except that service of the summons by mail is not authorized. Service of summons and complaint prior to filing and authentication is authorized and required pursuant to sec. 799.12(7). This rule required Hovey to serve Allstate with a copy of the summons and complaint before the matter was filed with the court. Hovey asserts that under the old rule her action was timely and the statute of limitation was tolled because her action was commenced when she served Allstate with a copy of the summons and complaint. Hovey argues that the legislature could not have intended that a small claims action was commenced when the summons and complaint were filed in the court because this would establish a shortened statute of limitations for small claims actions. Hovey cites no cases or statutory authority in support of her position. 2 As of March 1999, a party may no longer serve the summons and complaint before the summons and complaint are filed with the court. 4

8 As noted, when interpreting several statutes dealing with the same subject matter, this court is obligated to construe them together and harmonize them. Here, there is no need to harmonize the two statutes because WIS. STAT. 893.02 and 801.02 are in total agreement. Both statutes state that an action is commenced when the summons and complaint are filed with the court. Moreover, case law supports this conclusion. Hester v. Williams, 117 Wis. 2d 634, 345 N.W.2d 426 (1984), is a case dealing with a large claim personal injury suit. The plaintiff improperly obtained service over the defendant before filing the matter in court, and then finally filed the summons and complaint after the statute of limitations had expired. The supreme court opined that [u]nder the laws of this state, in order to commence an action for personal injuries, a summons and complaint must be filed with the court within three years of the accrual of the cause of action and authenticated copies must be served upon the defendant within 60 days of the filing. Id. at 640. 9 Hovey argues that her case is distinguishable, because even though her suit is for personal injuries, she submits that the differences between large and small claim procedures produces a different commencement time. 10 A review of Chapter 799, Procedure in Small Claims Actions, of the Wisconsin Statutes does not support Hovey s position. Nowhere in the chapter does it state that an action is commenced when the moving party obtains service on the defendant. To the contrary, WIS. STAT. 799.04 commands that: Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the general rules of practice and procedure in chs. 750 to 758 and 801 to 847 shall apply to actions and proceedings under this chapter. Thus, the rules set forth in Chapter 801 apply unless a provision in Chapter 799 states otherwise. No provision in Chapter 799 contradicts the rule 5

found in WIS. STAT. 801.02, stating that an action is commenced when a summons and a complaint naming the person as defendant are filed with the court. 11 With respect to Hovey s argument that the legislature could not have intended to shorten the statute of limitation, this court notes that requiring a party to file the small claims action with the court within three years does not shorten the statute of limitations. The former procedure merely required service before filing, while the current procedure allows service after filing. Under either procedure, three years was the time frame allowed for filing an action with the court. Moreover, this court cannot delve into the legislature s intent unless a statute is found to be ambiguous. See McEvoy v. Group Health Coop., 213 Wis. 2d 507, 528, 570 N.W.2d 397 (1997). Neither WIS. STAT. 801.02 nor WIS. STAT. 893.02 is ambiguous. Thus, this court must accept the statutory directives and concludes that the statute of limitations expired when Hovey filed her action with the court on October 8, 1998. For the reasons stated, the trial court is affirmed. By the Court. Order affirmed. 809.23(1)(b)4. This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. RULE 6