Zellner v. Cedarburg School District
Wisconsin Supreme Court
731 N.W.2d 240 (2007)

- Written by Laura Julien, JD
Facts
Robert Zellner (plaintiff) was a high school teacher at the Cedarburg School District (the school district). In 2006 the school district conducted a hearing and terminated Zellner for allegedly viewing adult websites on his work computer. Two local newspapers (the newspapers) (defendant) requested copies of all exhibits that were presented at the school district’s termination hearing. The school district agreed to release a memo and a CD with images obtained during a forensic analysis of Zellner’s computer. The CD contained copyrighted images pulled from the adult websites. Zellner filed an action in circuit court seeking de novo review of the school district’s decision to release the documents, asserting that the CD was not a record under Wisconsin’s open-records law because it contained information protected by federal copyright laws. The newspapers argued that Zellner’s interpretation of the statute was too broad and that producing the documents would fall within the fair-use exemption of copyright infringement. Zellner further argued that the release of the documents would harm his reputation and privacy. The circuit court found that Zellner had proper standing to raise the claim. The circuit court also held that the materials should be disclosed, notwithstanding their copyrighted status. Zellner filed an appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crooks, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.