Daniel Lynch v. Carriage Ridge, LLC
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2004 WI 53 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: COMPLETE TITLE: OF WISCONSIN 02-0528 Daniel Lynch and Judith O. Lynch, Plaintiffs-Appellants-CrossRespondents-Petitioners, v. Carriage Ridge, LLC, Defendant-Respondent, Thomas F. Bunbury and Ronald T. Restaino, Defendants-Respondents-CrossAppellants-Cross Petitioners. REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS Reported at: 266 Wis. 2d 1059, 668 N.W.2d 562 (Ct. App. 2003-Unpublished) OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: April 29, 2004 SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: Circuit Dane David T. Flanagan JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ROGGENSACK, J., did not participate. May 18, 2004 ATTORNEYS: For the plaintiffs-appellants-cross-respondents-petitioners there were briefs by Gary A. Ahrens, Christine Cooney Mansour and Michael Best & Friedrich, LLP, Milwaukee, and oral argument by Gary A. Ahrens. For the defendants-respondents-cross-appellants-cross petitioners there were briefs by Brian E. Butler, Michelle M. Affatati and Stafford Rosenbaum LLP, Madison, and oral argument by Brian E. Butler. For the defendant-respondent there was a brief by Terry E. Johnson, Maria D. Sanders and Peterson, Johnson & Murray, S.C., Milwaukee. 2 2004 WI 53 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 02-0528 (L.C. No. 00 CV 1957) STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT Daniel Lynch and Judith O. Lynch, Plaintiffs-Appellants-CrossRespondents-Petitioners, FILED v. Carriage Ridge, LLC, MAY 18, 2004 Defendant-Respondent, Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court Thomas F. Bunbury and Ronald T. Restaino, Defendants-Respondents-CrossAppellants-Cross Petitioners. REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. ¶1 PER CURIAM. The court is equally Affirmed. divided on the question of whether the decision of the court of appeals, Lynch v. Carriage Ridge, unpublished per curiam op. (Wis. Ct. App. July 24, 2003), should be affirmed or reversed. Chief Justice SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, Justice ANN WALSH BRADLEY, and Justice DAVID T. PROSSER would affirm; Justice JON P. WILCOX, Justice N. No. PATRICK CROOKS, and Justice DIANE S. SYKES would 02-0528 reverse. Justice PATIENCE D. ROGGENSACK did not participate. ¶2 Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed. 2 No. 1 02-0528
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
