(1) TIME OF HEARING; PROVISION OF REPORTS. (a)Time of hearing for petition. A petition for guardianship, other than a petition under par. (b) or (c) or s. 54.50(1), shall be heard within 90 days after it is filed. The guardian ad litem and attorney for the proposed ward or ward shall be provided with a copy of the report of the examining physician or psychologist under s. 54.36(1) at least 96 hours before the time of the hearing.(b)Time of hearing for certain appointments. A petition for guardianship of an individual who has been admitted to a nursing home or a community-based residential facility under s. 50.06 shall be heard within 60 days after it is filed. If an individual under s. 50.06(3) alleges that an individual is making a health care decision under s. 50.06(5) (a) that is not in the best interests of the incapacitated individual or if the incapacitated individual verbally objects to or otherwise actively protests the admission, the petition shall be heard as soon as possible within the 60-day period.(c)Time of hearing for petition for receipt and acceptance of a foreign guardianship.1. If a motion for a hearing on a petition for receipt and acceptance of a foreign guardianship is made by the foreign ward, by a person who has received notice under s. 53.32(2), or on the court's own motion, a hearing on the petition shall be heard within 90 days after the petition is filed.2. If a petition for receipt and acceptance of a foreign guardianship includes a request to modify the provisions of the foreign guardianship, the petition shall be heard within 90 days after it is filed.3. If a person receiving notice of the petition for receipt and acceptance of the foreign guardianship challenges the validity of the foreign guardianship or the authority of the foreign court to appoint the foreign guardian, the court may stay the proceeding under this subsection to afford the opportunity to the interested person to have the foreign court hear the challenge and determine its merits.(2) STANDARD OF PROOF. Any determination by the court as to whether the proposed ward or ward is a minor, is incompetent, or is a spendthrift shall be by clear and convincing evidence.(3) PRESENCE OF PROPOSED GUARDIAN OR PETITIONER.(a) The proposed guardian and any proposed standby guardian shall be physically present at the hearing unless the court excuses the attendance of either or, for good cause shown, permits attendance by telephone.(b) The petitioner, for a petition for receipt and acceptance of a foreign guardianship, shall be physically present at the hearing specified under sub. (1) (c) unless the court excuses the petitioner's attendance or, for good cause shown, permits attendance by telephone.(4) PRESENCE OF PROPOSED WARD OR WARD.(a)Adult proposed ward or ward. The petitioner shall ensure that the proposed ward or ward attends the hearing unless the attendance is waived by the guardian ad litem. In determining whether to waive attendance by the proposed ward or ward, the guardian ad litem shall consider the ability of the proposed ward or ward to understand and meaningfully participate, the effect of the attendance of the proposed ward or ward on his or her physical or psychological health in relation to the importance of the proceeding, and the expressed desires of the proposed ward or ward. If the proposed ward or ward is unable to attend the hearing because of residency in a nursing home or other facility, physical inaccessibility, or a lack of transportation and if the proposed ward or ward, guardian ad litem, advocate counsel, or other interested person so requests, the court shall hold the hearing in a place where the proposed ward or ward may attend.(b)Minor proposed ward or ward. A minor proposed ward or ward is not required to attend the hearing.(c)Foreign ward. The petitioner for a petition for receipt and acceptance of a foreign guardianship shall ensure that the foreign ward attends the hearing unless the attendance is waived by the guardian ad litem. In determining whether to waive attendance by the foreign ward, the guardian ad litem shall consider the ability of the foreign ward to understand and meaningfully participate, the effect of the foreign ward's attendance on his or her physical or psychological health in relation to the importance of the proceeding, and the foreign ward's expressed desires. If the foreign ward is unable to attend the hearing because of residency in a nursing home or other facility, physical inaccessibility, or a lack of transportation and if the foreign ward, guardian ad litem, advocate counsel, or other interested person so requests, the court shall hold the hearing in a place where the foreign ward may attend.(5) PRIVACY OF HEARING. Every hearing under this chapter shall be closed, unless the proposed ward or ward or his or her attorney acting with the proposed ward's or ward's consent or the attorney for a foreign ward moves that it be open. If the hearing is closed, only interested persons, their attorneys, and witnesses may be present.(5m) PARTICIPATION BY INTERESTED PERSONS. An interested person may participate in the hearing on the petition at the court's discretion.(6) PROPOSED GUARDIAN UNSUITABLE. If the court finds that the proposed guardian is unsuitable, the court shall request that a petition proposing a suitable guardian be filed, shall set a date for a hearing to be held within 30 days, and shall require the guardian ad litem to investigate the suitability of a new proposed guardian.Amended by Acts 2018 ch, 187,s 8, eff. 4/5/2018.2005 a. 387 ss. 100, 333; 2007 a. 45; 2007 a. 97 ss. 78, 233.The above annotations relate to guardianships under ch. 880, stats., prior to the revision of and renumbering of that chapter to ch. 54 by 2005 Wis. Act 387.
The statutory provisions for an interested person's formal participation in guardianship and protective placement hearings are specific and limited. No statute provides for interested persons to demand a trial, present evidence, or raise evidentiary objections. A court could consider such participation helpful and in its discretion allow an interested person to participate to the extent it considers appropriate. Coston v. Joseph P., 222 Wis. 2d 1, 586 N.W.2d 52 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-1210. Section 907.03 does not allow the proponent of an expert to use the expert solely as a conduit for the hearsay opinions of others. While in a civil proceeding there is no independent right to confront and cross-examine expert witnesses under the state and federal constitutions, procedures used to appoint a guardian and protectively place an individual must conform to the essentials of due process. Walworth County v. Therese B., 2003 WI App 223, 267 Wis. 2d 310, 671 N.W.2d 377, 03-0967. It would be unreasonable to not permit a forfeiture of the right to attend the hearing regardless of the respondent's conduct. The right may be forfeited if after having been warned by the judge that he or she will be removed if he or she continues the disruptive behavior, the respondent nevertheless insists on conducting himself or herself in a manner so disorderly, disruptive, and disrespectful of the court that the hearing cannot be carried on with him or her in the courtroom. Jefferson County v. Joseph S., 2010 WI App 160, 330 Wis. 2d 737, 795 N.W.2d 450, 09-0804. A party cannot waive a challenge to the competency of a court based on a statutory limitation period such as that in sub. (1) (a). Tina B. v. Richard H., 2014 WI App 123, 359 Wis. 2d 204, 857 N.W.2d 432, 13-2534.