Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 133.02 (2026)
Definitions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
133.02(1)(1) “Commodity” includes, but is not limited to, goods, merchandise, produce and any other article of commerce. “Commodity” includes services, except as used in s. 133.04.
133.02(3)(3) “Person” includes individuals, the state and all its political subdivisions, all counties, cities, villages, towns, school districts, governmental agencies and bodies politic and corporate, and all corporations, limited liability companies, partnerships, associations, companies, firms, joint ventures, joint stock companies, trusts, business trusts, estates and other legal or commercial entities existing under or authorized by the laws of this or any other state, the United States or any of its territories or any foreign country. Nothing in this definition may be construed to affect labor unions or any other association of laborers organized to promote the welfare of its members, nor associations or organizations intended to legitimately promote the interests of trade, commerce or manufacturing in this state, nor associations, corporate or otherwise, of farmers, gardeners or dairy workers or owners, including livestock farmers and fruit growers engaged in making collective sales or marketing for its members or shareholders of farm, orchard or dairy products produced by its members or shareholders if such activities are exempted under s. 133.07, 133.08 or 133.09 or are otherwise lawful under this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1988–2017 · leading case: Thomas F. Benson v. City of Madison, 2017 WI 65 (Wis. 2017).
Thomas F. Benson v. City of Madison, 2017 WI 65 (Wis. 2017). “"13 ¶96 For example, the Wisconsin antitrust law unequivocally defines "person" for purposes of that law to include "individuals, the state and all its political subdivisions, all counties, cities, villages, towns, school districts, governmental agencies and bodies politic and…”
E-Z Roll Off, LLC v. Cnty. of Oneida, 2011 WI 71 (Wis. 2011). “Wis. Stat. § 133.02 (3). Second, it sets out various prohibited practices: Wis.”
Emergency One, Inc. v. Waterous Co., Inc., 23 F. Supp. 2d 959 (E.D. Wis. 1998). “Among the more significant changes, the new chapter: allows the state and its political subdivisions to sue for treble damages if injured by antitrust violations, see Wis. Stat. §§ 133.02 (3) & 133.18(l)(a); specifies a six-year statute of limitations for all *963 civil…”
Town of Neenah Sanitary Dist. No. 2 v. City of Neenah, 2002 WI App 155 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 133.02 (3), the City is a "person" for purposes of § 133.”
Cedarhurst Air Charter, Inc. v. Waukesha Cnty., 110 F. Supp. 2d 891 (E.D. Wis. 2000). “” The plaintiff disagrees and argues that several statutes demonstrate the legislature’s intent to forbid the allegedly anti-competitive conduct challenged here.”
Lerma v. Univision Commc'ns, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (E.D. Wis. 1999). “Wisconsin Statute § 133.02(3) reads: Every person who monopolizes, or attempts to monopolize, or combines or conspires with any other person or persons to monopolize any part of trade or commerce may be fined not more than $100,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, may…”
Am. Med. Transp. of Wisconsin, Inc. v. Curtis-Universal, Inc., 435 N.W.2d 286 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988). “, 384 U.S. 563, 570-571 (1966). A. Antitrust Claims Against Milwaukee Municipalities, like Milwaukee, are “persons” for the purposes of antitrust liability under secs.”
— Wis. Stat. § 133.02(3) — 3 cases
Cedarhurst Air Charter, Inc. v. Waukesha Cnty., 110 F. Supp. 2d 891 (E.D. Wis. 2000). “” The plaintiff disagrees and argues that several statutes demonstrate the legislature’s intent to forbid the allegedly anti-competitive conduct challenged here.”
Lerma v. Univision Commc'ns, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (E.D. Wis. 1999). “Wisconsin Statute § 133.02(3) reads: Every person who monopolizes, or attempts to monopolize, or combines or conspires with any other person or persons to monopolize any part of trade or commerce may be fined not more than $100,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, may…”
Am. Med. Transp. of Wisconsin, Inc. v. Curtis-Universal, Inc., 435 N.W.2d 286 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988). “, 384 U.S. 563, 570-571 (1966). A. Antitrust Claims Against Milwaukee Municipalities, like Milwaukee, are “persons” for the purposes of antitrust liability under secs.”
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.