1. ELEMENTS B1 & B2 POWER POINT SLIDES
Class #9 Tuesday, September 6, 2016 Wednesday, September 7,

2. THURSDAY: BOTH CLASSES HERE No Reserved Seating
MUSIC: SERGEI PROKOFIEV, PETER & THE WOLF (1936) Chamber Orchestra of Europe (2007) conductOR: CLAUDIO ABBADO NARRATOR: STING
THURSDAY: BOTH CLASSES HERE No Reserved Seating

3. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914

4. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: Deaths
Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (Civil War Hero)
John Muir (Naturalist)
Jacob Riis (Journalist/Author)
19th Century Industrialists
CW Post (Grape Nuts & Other Cereals)
George Westinghouse (Railroad Brake and Electronics)
Frederik Weyerhauser (Timber & Paper)

5. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: Births
Alec Guiness
Joe Louis
Joe DiMaggio
Ralph Ellison
Danny Thomas
Dylan Thomas

6. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: Introduced in U.S.
term “Birth Control” (coined by Margaret Sanger)
First Blood Transfusion
Doublemint chewing gum
Elastic Brassiere
Federal Trade Commission
Company that will become Greyhound Bus
Mother’s Day (by Congr. Resolution)

7. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: Introduced in U.S.
New Republic Magazine
Panama Canal
Pygmalion by GB Shaw
Rookie Pitcher: Babe Ruth
Tarzan of the Apes
Teletype Machine
Traffic Lights using red-green signals

8. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: World War I
102 Years Ago Yesterday:
Sept. 5: 1st Battle of the Marne Begins
NE of Paris, French 6th Army Attacks Germans  Allied Victory (Keeps German Army out of Paris)

9. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: World War I
102 Years Ago Yesterday:
Sept. 5: 1st Battle of the Marne Begins
NE of Paris, French 6th Army Attacks Germans  Allied “Victory”
Two Million Soldiers Participate

10. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: World War I
102 Years Ago Yesterday:
Sept. 5: 1st Battle of the Marne Begins
NE of Paris, French 6th Army Attacks Germans  Allied “Victory”
Two Million Soldiers Participate
500,000 Killed or Wounded

11. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: World War I
Sept. 5: 1st Battle of the Marne Begins
NE of Paris, French Attacks Germans  Allied “Victory”
Two Million Soldiers Participate
500,000 Killed or Wounded
Dec : Christmas Truce

12. Liesner v. Wanie: Context
1914: World War I
June 28: Archduke Francis-Ferdinand (Heir to the Austro-Hungarian Throne) Assassinated in Sarajevo:
“The Shot Heard Round the World”

13. Cf. “Some Shots Into a Brush Pile” (Liesner Trial Transcript)
Liesner v. Wanie
Cf. “Some Shots Into a Brush Pile”
(Liesner Trial Transcript)
featuring
KRYPTON & URANIUM

14. Liesner Trial Transcript
Note Anderson testimony (p.17):
“REPLEVIED”
Suggests replevin was cause of action.
(= Common law action for return of personal property)

15. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ1.19: Best Evidence for Each Side
(Krypton) Liesners’ Attys must have argued:
L-Boys did mortally wound wolf
L-Boys did continue pursuit
(Uranium) Wanie’s Attys must have argued:
Uncertain that L-Boys mortally wounded wolf
L-Boys did not continue pursuit
TO WHITEBOARD

16. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ1.20 Trial Judge’s Perspective
To make this decision, Judge must believe:
Abdomen shot was mortal wound (“gut shot”; wolf’s behavior)
Only shot that could have made that wound was Ed Liesner shot (bullet/angle)
Questions/Concerns?

17. Liesner Trial DQ1.20: Trial Judge’s Perspective
Trial Judge must have believed:
Abdomen shot was mortal wound (“gut shot”; wolf’s behavior)
Only evidence of shot that could have made that wound was Liesner shot (bullet/angle)
Keep in Mind
Judge might have experience with guns/hunting
Judge could see pelt & holes
Not every factual dispute is material to outcome.
Whether there was “manure” in abdominal cavity
Whether Wanie tried to hide bullet hole
Liesner Trial DQ1.20: Trial Judge’s Perspective

18. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ1.21 Uranium
Why Bother?
Why do you think the Liesner family chose to bring this lawsuit?

19. Liesner Trial: DQ1.21 Uranium
Liesner Family Motivations? Ideas include:
Father Acting as Good Parent; Maybe Related to Either:
Shooting = important coming-of-age moment for boys (1st wolf seen/killed)
Father protecting boys against perceived bully/cheater
Maybe reflective of larger social/economic split in community

20. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ1.21 Uranium
Why Bother?
Why do you think Wanie expended the resources needed to take the case to the state Supreme Court?

21. Liesner Trial: DQ1.21 Uranium
Wanie Motivations? Ideas include:
Defending Liesner father’s challenge to his integrity (manure/patch)
Again, maybe reflective of larger split in community
Interest as regular hunter in clarifying rules/fixing bad result (although concedes prevailing rule)

22. Liesner Trial: DQ1.22
Relevance of additional facts found in trial record to how you should read/use the appellate opinion?
Helps you to understand what happened BUT normally unavailable to lawyers.
Meaning of written opinion:
Determined by what Wisc SCt chooses to include
What doesn’t go into opinion isn’t part of opinion (cf. Las Vegas)

23. Back to OXYGEN for DQ1.18 & Liesner “Prevailing Rule” NOTE: Thursday we’ll do Intro to Shaw Brief (OXYGEN) before DQs (RADIUM) Fortunately, O2 on Thursday!!

24. “Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations):
Liesner DQ1.18: Oxygen
“Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations):
(1) substantially permanently deprive [animal] of liberty (SPDL)
(2) [have the animal] so in their power that escape improbable, if not impossible
(3) [bring the animal] under control so that actual possession practically inevitable

25. Liesner DQ1.18(b): Oxygen
(1) substantially permanently deprive [animal] of liberty
(2) [have the animal] so in their power that escape improbable, if not impossible
(3) [bring the animal] under control so that actual possession practically inevitable
All three formulations contain an imprecise word meaning something like “almost completely.”

26. COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #3?
Liesner DQ1.18 (b): Oxygen
COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES
Actual Possession Likely
Actual Possession Practically Inevitable
Actual Possession Inevitable
Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #3?

27. Liesner DQ1.18 (b): Oxygen
Actual Possession Practically Inevitable
Actual Possession Inevitable
Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #3 Include
Too difficult to meet standard for #3
Discourages hunters  fewer kills
Doesn’t reward most-of the-way labor
Impossible-to-meet standard may yield disrespect for law, self-help; violence (B2: Wisnoski: breakdown of peace and order as people like Liesners try to enforce perceived “rights.”)

28. COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #1?
Liesner DQ1.18 (b): Oxygen
COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES
Actual Possession Likely
Actual Possession Practically Inevitable
Actual Possession Inevitable
Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #1?

29. Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #1 Include
Liesner DQ1.18 (b): Oxygen
Actual Possession Likely
Actual Possession Practically Inevitable
Policies Supporting Choice of #2 v. #1 Include
#1 = Too uncertain in application
Yields too many disputes/lawsuits (v. higher claim threshold for #2)
May reward ineffective/insufficient labor (too easy to meet)

30. Liesner DQ1.18: Prevailing Rule (Oxygen)
(1) substantially permanently deprive [animal] of liberty
(2) [have the animal] so in their power that escape improbable, if not impossible
(3) [bring the animal] under control so that actual possession practically inevitable
1.18(a): Meaning of Key Language?
1.18(c): Application to Pierson Facts?

31. Property Rights in Animal IF: Significance of Two Separate Adverbs?
Liesner DQ1.18 (a): Oxygen
Property Rights in Animal IF:
(1) substantially permanently deprived [animal] of its liberty
MEANING OF LANGUAGE
Significance of Two Separate Adverbs?