18 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1964–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Gillettegreen2 sentences2024This conclusion is particularly reasonable given that our state supreme court has previously overruled the doctrine of lex loci delicti,7 see Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617, 621 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), and alleged tortfeasors should not presume that their alleged tortious conduct will be dictated by the forum where the alleged conduct occurred. 7 “Lex loci delicti is a choice of law principle in tort cases which states that the right to bring an action vests at the place of injury, and courts therefore should apply the law of that place.” Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, 2007In particular, our supreme court has explained that, when performing a choice of law analysis, courts first presume that the law of the forum applies unless it " 'becomes clear that nonforum contacts are of the greater significance,'" State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31, ¶ 51 , 251 Wis. 2d 561 , 641 N.W.2d 662 (citation omitted), or unless the nonforum state's contacts are " 'so obviously limited and minimal that application of that state's law constitutes officious intermeddling,' " Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Grade, 2004 WI 39, ¶ 24 , 270 Wis. 2d 356 , 677 N.W. | 2 | 3 |
Drinkwater v. American Family Mutual Insurancegreen2 sentences2025We therefore apply the analysis from Drinkwater. ¶60 The first rule in the choice of law analysis is “that the law of the forum should presumptively apply unless it becomes clear that nonforum contacts are of the greater significance.” Drinkwater, 290 Wis. 2d 642, ¶40 (citation omitted). 2007In particular, our supreme court has explained that, when performing a choice of law analysis, courts first presume that the law of the forum applies unless it " 'becomes clear that nonforum contacts are of the greater significance,'" State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31, ¶ 51 , 251 Wis. 2d 561 , 641 N.W.2d 662 (citation omitted), or unless the nonforum state's contacts are " 'so obviously limited and minimal that application of that state's law constitutes officious intermeddling,' " Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Grade, 2004 WI 39, ¶ 24 , 270 Wis. 2d 356 , 677 N.W. | 2 | 2 |
Bush v. National School Studios, Inc.green2 sentences2007Id. at 644-45 . 2006See Bush, 139 Wis. 2d at 642 ; Kobs, 179 Wis. 2d at 428 . | 1 | 2 |
Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Gradegreen2 sentences2007In particular, our supreme court has explained that, when performing a choice of law analysis, courts first presume that the law of the forum applies unless it " 'becomes clear that nonforum contacts are of the greater significance,'" State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31, ¶ 51 , 251 Wis. 2d 561 , 641 N.W.2d 662 (citation omitted), or unless the nonforum state's contacts are " 'so obviously limited and minimal that application of that state's law constitutes officious intermeddling,' " Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Grade, 2004 WI 39, ¶ 24 , 270 Wis. 2d 356 , 677 N.W. 2007In particular, our supreme court has explained that, when performing a choice of law analysis, courts first presume that the law of the forum applies unless it " 'becomes clear that nonforum contacts are of the greater significance,'" State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31, ¶ 51 , 251 Wis. 2d 561 , 641 N.W.2d 662 (citation omitted), or unless the nonforum state's contacts are " 'so obviously limited and minimal that application of that state's law constitutes officious intermeddling,' " Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Grade, 2004 WI 39, ¶ 24 , 270 Wis. 2d 356 , 677 N.W. | 1 | 2 |
Beilfuss v. Huffy Corp.green1 sentence2025We determined that the “public policy concerns with covenants not to compete can be found in the explicit purpose of … § 103.465 [(1995-96)], which is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.” Beilfuss, 274 Wis. 2d 500, ¶14 (citing Heyde Cos. v. Dove Healthcare, LLC, 2002 WI 131, ¶¶13, 22 , 258 Wis. 2d 28 , 654 N.W.2d 830 (“[T]he explicit purpose of § 103.465 [(1999-2000)], as plainly stated in the statute, is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.”)). ¶27 In addition, we considered it relevant to the choice of law analysis th | 1 | 1 |
Heyde Companies v. Dove Healthcare, LLCgreen2 sentences2025We determined that the “public policy concerns with covenants not to compete can be found in the explicit purpose of … § 103.465 [(1995-96)], which is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.” Beilfuss, 274 Wis. 2d 500, ¶14 (citing Heyde Cos. v. Dove Healthcare, LLC, 2002 WI 131, ¶¶13, 22 , 258 Wis. 2d 28 , 654 N.W.2d 830 (“[T]he explicit purpose of § 103.465 [(1999-2000)], as plainly stated in the statute, is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.”)). ¶27 In addition, we considered it relevant to the choice of law analysis th 2025We determined that the “public policy concerns with covenants not to compete can be found in the explicit purpose of … § 103.465 [(1995-96)], which is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.” Beilfuss, 274 Wis. 2d 500, ¶14 (citing Heyde Cos. v. Dove Healthcare, LLC, 2002 WI 131, ¶¶13, 22 , 258 Wis. 2d 28 , 654 N.W.2d 830 (“[T]he explicit purpose of § 103.465 [(1999-2000)], as plainly stated in the statute, is to invalidate covenants that impose unreasonable restraints on employees.”)). ¶27 In addition, we considered it relevant to the choice of law analysis th | 1 | 1 |
Roehl Transport, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurancegreen1 sentence2024See Roehl Transp., 325 Wis. 2d 56, ¶40 ; Anderson, 85 Wis. 2d at 687 . | 1 | 1 |
Karow v. Milwaukee County Civil Service Commissiongreen2 sentences2021Comm’n, 82 Wis. 2d 565, 570 , 263 N.W.2d 214 (1978) (“the word ‘shall’ is presumed mandatory when it appears in a statute”), we construe the word “shall” here to read the choice of law clause as mandatory. 10 No. 2020AP1195 ¶32 The second sentence is an unambiguous, mandatory forum selection clause that, based on the ordinary meaning of its language, requires the parties to bring any claim arising under or relating to the Asset Sale Agreement in the state courts of the State of California. 2021Comm’n, 82 Wis. 2d 565, 570 , 263 N.W.2d 214 (1978) (“the word ‘shall’ is presumed mandatory when it appears in a statute”), we construe the word “shall” here to read the choice of law clause as mandatory. 10 No. 2020AP1195 ¶32 The second sentence is an unambiguous, mandatory forum selection clause that, based on the ordinary meaning of its language, requires the parties to bring any claim arising under or relating to the Asset Sale Agreement in the state courts of the State of California. | 1 | 1 |
Amjad T. Tufail v. Midwest Hospitality, LLCgreen1 sentence2021See Tufail, 348 Wis. 2d 631, ¶28 (“Contract language is construed according to its plain or ordinary meaning.”). | 1 | 1 |
Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Pelczynskigreen1 sentence2010See Employers Ins. of Wausau, 153 Wis. 2d at 309 ("Because there is a genuine conflict of law, a choice of law question is presented."). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp.green1 sentence2004By the Court. — Order reversed. 1 We note that the contract at issue did not contain a choice of law clause. 2 All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2001-02 version unless otherwise noted. 3 Leasefirst v. Hartford Rexall Drugs, Inc., 168 Wis. 2d 83, 88-89 , 483 N.W.2d 585 (Ct. App. 1992), summarized a longer discussion about unconscionability in Discount Fabric House v. Wisconsin Telephone Co., 117 Wis. 2d 587, 600-02 , 345 N.W.2d 417 (1984); there, quoting from Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264, 268 (E.D. | 1 | 1 |
Lichter v. Fritschgreen2 sentences2003See Lichter v. Fritsch, 77 Wis. 2d 178, 182 , 252 N.W.2d 360 (1977) (The first step in a choice of law analysis is to determine whether the choice of one law over another will affect the outcome.). 5 *563 ¶ 22. 2003See Lichter v. Fritsch, 77 Wis. 2d 178, 182 , 252 N.W.2d 360 (1977) (The first step in a choice of law analysis is to determine whether the choice of one law over another will affect the outcome.). 5 *563 ¶ 22. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wilcox v. Wilcox
green
2 sentences2024This conclusion is particularly reasonable given that our state supreme court has previously overruled the doctrine of lex loci delicti,7 see Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617, 621 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), and alleged tortfeasors should not presume that their alleged tortious conduct will be dictated by the forum where the alleged conduct occurred. 7 “Lex loci delicti is a choice of law principle in tort cases which states that the right to bring an action vests at the place of injury, and courts therefore should apply the law of that place.” Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, 2024This conclusion is particularly reasonable given that our state supreme court has previously overruled the doctrine of lex loci delicti,7 see Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617, 621 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), and alleged tortfeasors should not presume that their alleged tortious conduct will be dictated by the forum where the alleged conduct occurred. 7 “Lex loci delicti is a choice of law principle in tort cases which states that the right to bring an action vests at the place of injury, and courts therefore should apply the law of that place.” Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, | 3 | 1968–2024 |
Leasefirst v. Hartford Rexall Drugs, Inc.
green
2 sentences2021Thus, enforcing the choice of law clause in this case would not come at the expense of Wisconsin’s policy regarding covenants not to compete because we are not called upon to enforce the agreement not to compete. ¶66 The plaintiffs argue that, regardless of the enforceability of the choice of law clause, the forum selection clause is unenforceable on the grounds that: (1) the clause is procedurally unconscionable because it was negotiated by Hunt, who subsequently went to work for American West, and because the parties’ bargaining power was unequal; and (2) the clause is substantively unconsci 2004By the Court. — Order reversed. 1 We note that the contract at issue did not contain a choice of law clause. 2 All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2001-02 version unless otherwise noted. 3 Leasefirst v. Hartford Rexall Drugs, Inc., 168 Wis. 2d 83, 88-89 , 483 N.W.2d 585 (Ct. App. 1992), summarized a longer discussion about unconscionability in Discount Fabric House v. Wisconsin Telephone Co., 117 Wis. 2d 587, 600-02 , 345 N.W.2d 417 (1984); there, quoting from Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264, 268 (E.D. | 2 | 2004–2021 |
Wenke Ex Rel. Laufenberg v. Gehl Co.
green
2 sentences2019Wenke v. Gehl Co. , 2004 WI 103 , ¶14, 274 Wis. 2d 220 , 682 N.W.2d 405 . 2019Wenke v. Gehl Co. , 2004 WI 103 , ¶14, 274 Wis. 2d 220 , 682 N.W.2d 405 . | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Brunke v. Popp
green
2 sentences1965In Brunke v. Popp (1963), 21 Wis. (2d) 458, 124 N. W. (2d) 642 , we referred to Babcock v. Jackson’s resolution of its choice-of-law problem on the basis of the state that had the most-significant relationship. 1964By footnote in Brunke v. Popp (1963), 21 Wis. (2d) 458, 461, 462, 124 N. W. (2d) 642 , we called attention to Babcock v. Jackson (1963), 12 N. Y. (2d) 473, 191 N. E. (2d) 279, wherein the New York court abandoned the traditional choice-of-law rule that the substantive rights and liabilities arising out of a tortious occurrence are determined by the place of the tort and refused to apply Ontario’s guest statute to an automobile accident which had occurred in Ontario involving residents of New York. | 2 | 1964–1965 |
BNP Paribas v. Olsen's Mill, Inc.
green
1 sentence2025STAT. § 128.17(1) mandates the order of distribution of the proceeds.”5 BNP Paribas, 335 Wis. 2d 427, ¶42 . ¶34 Significant to the choice of law analysis in this case, Wisconsin “law favors the equal distribution of assets when creditors cannot be fully paid.” Freund, 389 Wis. 2d 35 , ¶25; WIS. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau
green
2 sentences2024This conclusion is particularly reasonable given that our state supreme court has previously overruled the doctrine of lex loci delicti,7 see Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617, 621 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), and alleged tortfeasors should not presume that their alleged tortious conduct will be dictated by the forum where the alleged conduct occurred. 7 “Lex loci delicti is a choice of law principle in tort cases which states that the right to bring an action vests at the place of injury, and courts therefore should apply the law of that place.” Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, 2024This conclusion is particularly reasonable given that our state supreme court has previously overruled the doctrine of lex loci delicti,7 see Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617, 621 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), and alleged tortfeasors should not presume that their alleged tortious conduct will be dictated by the forum where the alleged conduct occurred. 7 “Lex loci delicti is a choice of law principle in tort cases which states that the right to bring an action vests at the place of injury, and courts therefore should apply the law of that place.” Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Schlussler v. American Family Mutual Insurance
green
1 sentence2024Under these facts, Wisconsin has the most significant relationship to the parties. “[M]edical treatments were received in Wisconsin … and the breach of the obligation to make payment occurred in Wisconsin.” See Schlussler, 157 Wis. 2d at 527 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Anderson v. Continental Insurance
green
1 sentence2024See Roehl Transp., 325 Wis. 2d 56, ¶40 ; Anderson, 85 Wis. 2d at 687 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Kender v. Auto-Owners Insurance
green
2 sentences2021Co., 2010 WI App 121, ¶14 , 329 Wis. 2d 378 , 793 N.W.2d 88 (courts perform a choice-of-law analysis when “there is a genuine conflict of law”). 2021Co., 2010 WI App 121, ¶14 , 329 Wis. 2d 378 , 793 N.W.2d 88 (courts perform a choice-of-law analysis when “there is a genuine conflict of law”). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
General Medical Corp. v. Kobs
green
2 sentences2006See Bush, 139 Wis. 2d at 642 ; Kobs, 179 Wis. 2d at 428 . 2006See Bush, 139 Wis. 2d at 642 ; Kobs, 179 Wis. 2d at 428 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Discount Fabric House of Racine, Inc. v. Wisconsin Telephone Co.
green
2 sentences2004By the Court. — Order reversed. 1 We note that the contract at issue did not contain a choice of law clause. 2 All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2001-02 version unless otherwise noted. 3 Leasefirst v. Hartford Rexall Drugs, Inc., 168 Wis. 2d 83, 88-89 , 483 N.W.2d 585 (Ct. App. 1992), summarized a longer discussion about unconscionability in Discount Fabric House v. Wisconsin Telephone Co., 117 Wis. 2d 587, 600-02 , 345 N.W.2d 417 (1984); there, quoting from Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264, 268 (E.D. 2004By the Court. — Order reversed. 1 We note that the contract at issue did not contain a choice of law clause. 2 All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2001-02 version unless otherwise noted. 3 Leasefirst v. Hartford Rexall Drugs, Inc., 168 Wis. 2d 83, 88-89 , 483 N.W.2d 585 (Ct. App. 1992), summarized a longer discussion about unconscionability in Discount Fabric House v. Wisconsin Telephone Co., 117 Wis. 2d 587, 600-02 , 345 N.W.2d 417 (1984); there, quoting from Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264, 268 (E.D. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Hall v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
American Standard Insurance v. Cleveland
green
1 sentence2004Standard, 124 Wis. 2d at 263 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Bain v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.
green
2 sentences2003In Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), this court overruled Bain v. Northern Pacific Railway Co., 120 Wis. 412 , 98 N.W 241 (1904), and succeeding cases which had held that the proper choice of law rule in Wisconsin is invariably lex loci delicti. 43 The reasoning the court used to alter the rule previously established by these cases has a striking parallel to the reasoning in this case. 2003In Wilcox v. Wilcox, 26 Wis. 2d 617 , 133 N.W.2d 408 (1965), this court overruled Bain v. Northern Pacific Railway Co., 120 Wis. 412 , 98 N.W. 241 (1904), and succeeding cases which had held that the proper choice of law rule in Wisconsin is invariably lex *126 loci delicti. [43] The reasoning the court used to alter the rule previously established by these cases has a striking parallel to the reasoning in this case. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Brown v. Gates
green
1 sentence1987We agree. [1] While Wisconsin courts have acknowledged that parties to a contract may expressly agree that the law of a particular jurisdiction shall control their contractual relations; Jefferis v. Austin, 182 Wis. 203, 205 , 196 N.W. 238 (1923); Brown v. Gates, 120 Wis. 349 , 97 N.W. 221 (1904); First Wis. Nat. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Jefferis v. Austin
green
2 sentences1987We agree. [1] While Wisconsin courts have acknowledged that parties to a contract may expressly agree that the law of a particular jurisdiction shall control their contractual relations; Jefferis v. Austin, 182 Wis. 203, 205 , 196 N.W. 238 (1923); Brown v. Gates, 120 Wis. 349 , 97 N.W. 221 (1904); First Wis. Nat. 1987We agree. [1] While Wisconsin courts have acknowledged that parties to a contract may expressly agree that the law of a particular jurisdiction shall control their contractual relations; Jefferis v. Austin, 182 Wis. 203, 205 , 196 N.W. 238 (1923); Brown v. Gates, 120 Wis. 349 , 97 N.W. 221 (1904); First Wis. Nat. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.