## Facts

- John and Jacqueline Stoppleworth sued Refuse Hideaway, Inc. and its owners for negligent landfill operation allegedly contaminating well water consumed by John Stoppleworth and causing his basal cell carcinoma.
- The liability insurer, Bituminous Fire & Marine Insurance Co., was joined as a named defendant.
- Before trial, defendants moved to bar any mention to the jury that Bituminous was a party and to remove its name from the caption and verdict form, arguing irrelevance and unfair prejudice.
- The circuit court granted the motion; the jury was not told Bituminous was a defendant.
- The jury found the landfill operators negligent but found their negligence was not a cause of John Stoppleworth’s cancer.
- The circuit court entered judgment dismissing the negligence claims and denied a motion for a new trial; the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether prohibiting mention to the jury that a joined liability insurer was a named defendant violated any constitutional or statutory right to jury trial.
2. Whether the nondisclosure affected the plaintiffs’ substantial rights such that a new trial was required.
3. Whether a procedural rule should require Wisconsin courts to identify all joined parties to the jury in future cases.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the judgment dismissing the action.
- The court held there is no constitutional right and no statutory requirement that all joined parties, including insurers, must be identified to the jury.
- The court held the order excluding the insurer’s identity did not affect any substantial right and did not deprive the plaintiffs of a fair trial.
- Exercising superintending authority, the court adopted a prospective procedural rule requiring courts in jury trials to identify all joined parties to the jury panel; the rule did not apply retroactively to this case.

## Legal Principles

- The constitutional guarantee of an “inviolate” jury trial protects the essential attributes of jury adjudication but does not mandate specific trial-format procedures such as naming every joined party to the jury.
- Absent a constitutional or statutory command, whether and how to disclose a joined insurer’s party status is a matter of trial procedure and management.
- A new trial is not warranted unless an alleged error affects a substantial right or undermines the fairness of the proceeding; speculative prejudice from nondisclosure is insufficient.
- Wisconsin courts must prospectively identify all joined parties to the jury panel in jury trials as a procedural rule announced under the court’s supervisory authority.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the verdict and dismissal because withholding the joined insurer’s identity from the jury violated no constitutional or statutory jury-trial right and caused no prejudicial effect on substantial rights, while also establishing a forward-looking rule that all joined parties must be identified to the jury panel in future jury trials.


Stoppleworth v. Refuse Hideaway, Inc., 546 N.W.2d 870 (Wis. 1996)