Summary
The Wisconsin Supreme Court considered whether judicial estoppel barred Basil E. Ryan from disputing ownership of a sunken barge placed in the Menomonee River. The court held that the evidence did not establish the required elements of judicial estoppel. It also held that summary judgment is unavailable in forfeiture actions under Wisconsin Statutes chapter 30 because the statutory procedures cannot be reconciled with summary judgment methodology, and it reversed and remanded.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether judicial estoppel barred Ryan from asserting that he and his corporate entities did not own the barge.
- Whether summary judgment is permitted in a forfeiture action for violations of Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 30.
Holdings
- Judicial estoppel did not apply because the State's documents did not show that Ryan took a position in the prior writ proceedings that was clearly inconsistent with his current position or that he convinced the first court to adopt an ownership position.
- Summary judgment is not permitted in forfeiture actions for violations of Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 30 because the procedural statutes governing those actions cannot be reconciled with Wisconsin's summary-judgment procedure.
- Summary judgment would not have been appropriate because genuine issues of material fact remained.
Key quotations
“We further conclude that summary judgment is not permitted in forfeiture actions for violations of Wis. Stat. ch. 30.” (at 700)
“Although the parties agreed to the filing of a written answer in lieu of an appearance, such an agreement cannot provide the basis to impose upon the statutory scheme a summary judgment procedure that does not otherwise exist.” (at 722)
Factual background
Ryan and related entities operated businesses at property abutting the Menomonee River, where a barge was stored and moored to a concrete wall. After the property was taken by eminent domain, Ryan and his businesses vacated but left the barge, which later partially sank and became stuck in the riverbed. The State alleged that Ryan violated Wisconsin statutes prohibiting unauthorized obstructions and structures in navigable waters. Ryan denied ownership and asserted that the barge belonged to Richard Schumacher and that the sinking resulted from the Department of Transportation's conduct.
Procedural history
The State commenced a forfeiture action by serving Ryan with a summons and complaint alleging violations of Wisconsin statutes governing navigable waters. Ryan filed a written answer by agreement in lieu of appearing and entering a plea. The circuit court applied judicial estoppel, granted the State summary judgment, later imposed forfeitures totaling $37,691.25 and required removal of the barge, and denied reconsideration. The court of appeals affirmed, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
Remand instructions
Remand to the Milwaukee County circuit court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion; the forfeiture action may not be resolved by summary judgment under the Chapter 30 and Chapter 23 procedures.