Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P brought an action against Ds for being a nuisance by committing prostitution. The case was decided on summary judgment. The injunction was entered by the trial court on an amended complaint filed by P alleging that Ds were prostitutes and that their prostitution activities in specified areas were a 'public nuisance.' Ds appealed from a judgment permanently enjoining them from engaging in prostitution-related activities within certain specified areas in the City of Milwaukee. Ds submitted affidavits stating that the injunction sought by P would interfere with their ability to live their lives in peace and to interact with friends and family members. They expressed concerns that they would violate the injunction if they spoke to someone who might be a prostitute even though they did not know it. They also averred that they were 'confused by what the injunction requires of me.' A Dr. Miller challenged P's attempt to show a connection between prostitution and drugs, crime, and disease. Additionally, Dr. Miller avers, contrary to P's contention, that prostitutes do not act in concert. This appeal was taken.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.