Sup. Ct. Order, 83 Wis. 2d xiii (1978); Sup. Ct. Order, 92 Wis. 2d xiii;
1991 a. 263
;
1995 a. 224
; Sup. Ct. Order No.
00-02
, 2001 WI 39, 242 Wis. 2d xxvii; Sup. Ct. Order No.
05-07
, 2006 WI 37, 287 Wis. 2d xix.
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1978:
The motion procedure under former Rule 251.71 is continued except that the time for replying to a motion is reduced from 10 to 7 days. A response is not required before action can be taken on a procedural motion because these motions include matters previously handled by letter request or which usually do not adversely affect the opposing party. If an opposing party is adversely affected by a procedural order, he has the right to request the court to reconsider it. Procedural orders include the granting of requests for enlargement of time, to file an amicus brief, or to file a brief in excess of the maximum established by the rules. This section is based on Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 27. Sub. (3) modifies the prior practice under which the filing of any motion stayed any due date until 20 days after the motion was decided. This could result in an unintentional shortening of the time in which a brief had to be filed. It could also result in an unnecessary delay if a ruling on the motion would not affect the outcome of the case, the issues to be presented to the court, or a brief or the record. [Re Order effective July 1, 1978]
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979:
Sub. (1) is amended by deleting a provision that required only an original and one copy of a motion be filed with an appellate court. With the amendment, the number of copies of a motion to be filed is now governed by 809.81 on the form of papers to be filed with an appellate court, which requires in sub. (2) that 4 copies of a paper be filed with the Court of Appeals and 8 copies with the Supreme Court. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1979]
Judicial Council Note, 2001:
?The 7-day time limits in subs. (1) and (2) have been changed to 11 days. Please see the comment to s. 808.07 (6) concerning time limits. Subsection (3) (a) was revised to include consolidation motions within the tolling provision. Subsection (3) (b) creates a tolling provision when a motion to supplement or correct the record is filed. Subsection (3) (c) creates a service requirement for motions affecting the time limits for transmittal of the record. [Re Order No. 00-02 effective July 1, 2001]
Judicial Council Note, 2006:
The amendment to s. 809.14 (1) and the creation of s. 809.14 (1m) to establish a shorter response time to appellate motions should advance the ultimate resolution of TPR appeals. [Re Order No. 05-07 effective July 1, 2006]
A motion to dismiss an appeal under sub. (3) does not extend the time for filing a cross-appeal. Rossmiller v. Rossmiller,
151 Wis. 2d 386
,
444 N.W.2d 445
(Ct. App. 1989).