Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 111.345 (2026)

Marital status; exceptions and special cases

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

111.345111.345 Marital status; exceptions and special cases. Notwithstanding s. 111.322, it is not employment discrimination because of marital status to prohibit an individual from directly supervising or being directly supervised by his or her spouse.

111.345 HistoryHistory: 1981 c. 334.

111.345 AnnotationA work rule intended to limit extramarital affairs among coemployees was not discrimination because of marital status. Federated Rural Electric Insurance Co. v. Kessler, 131 Wis. 2d 189, 388 N.W.2d 553 (1986).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1993–1999 · leading case: Motola v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 580 N.W.2d 297 (Wis. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Motola v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 580 N.W.2d 297 (Wis. 1998). · cites it 8× “Motola argues that because the legislature enumerated only one exception from the WFEA's marital status clause, that of preventing an employee spouse from supervising his or her spouse, see Wis. Stat. § 111.345 , the court must conclude that the legislature did not adopt any…”

Bammert v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2000 WI App 28 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 9× “Bammert nevertheless contends that LIRC's interpretation of marital status discrimination *378 under the WFEA makes the language of § 111.345, Stats., superfluous. Section 111.”

Braatz v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 496 N.W.2d 597 (Wis. 1993). · cites it 2× “" Section 111.345, Stats. The declaration of policy in sec.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.