Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 133 — TRUSTS AND MONOPOLIES
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 133.14 (2026)

Illegal contracts void; recovery

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
133.14133.14 Illegal contracts void; recovery. All contracts or agreements made by any person while a member of any combination or conspiracy prohibited by s. 133.03, and which contract or agreement is founded upon, is the result of, grows out of or is connected with any violation of such section, either directly or indirectly, shall be void and no recovery thereon or benefit therefrom may be had by or for such person. Any payment made upon, under or pursuant to such contract or agreement to or for the benefit of any person may be recovered from any person who received or benefited from such payment in an action by the party making any such payment or the heirs, personal representative or assigns of the party.
133.14 HistoryHistory: 1979 c. 209.
133.14 AnnotationThe fact that plaintiff gave illegal rebates to competitors is no defense to an action for the price of goods sold. Roux Laboratories v. Beauty Franchises, 60 Wis. 2d 427, 210 N.W.2d 441.
133.14 AnnotationRemedy provided by s. 133.23 (1969 stats.) is not on its face unconstitutional. Madison v. Hyland, Hall & Co. 73 Wis. 2d 364, 243 N.W.2d 422.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: IDX Sys. Corp. v. Epic Sys. Corp., 165 F. Supp. 2d 812 (W.D. Wis. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
IDX Sys. Corp. v. Epic Sys. Corp., 165 F. Supp. 2d 812 (W.D. Wis. 2001). · cites it 20× “Said defendant also seeks to recover all monies paid under the contracts pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 133.14 . A Declaratory Judgment — Wis.”
Ashley Furniture Indus., Inc. v. Packaging Corp. of Am., 275 F. Supp. 3d 957 (W.D. Wis. 2017). · cites it 10× “) Defendants acknowledge in their opening brief that plaintiff Ashley Furniture also asserts claims under Wis. Stat. § 133.14 , but argue that the state law claims are largely immaterial to the transfer analysis, because “the legal standard is the same under either statute,”…”
E-Z Roll Off, LLC v. Cnty. of Oneida, 2011 WI 71 (Wis. 2011). · cites it 4× “133: Wis. Stat. § 133.14 (illegal contracts are void); Wis.”
Learjet, Inc. v. Oneok, Inc., 715 F.3d 716 (9th Cir. 2013). “Any payment made upon, under or pursuant to such contract or agreement to or for the benefit of any person may be recovered from any person who received or bene-fitted from such payment in an action by the party making any such payment or the heirs, personal representative or…”
In re Linerboard Antitrust Litig., 223 F.R.D. 335 (E.D. Pa. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 47-25-106; Wis. Stat. § 133.14 . However, as this Court noted several years ago, an individual plaintiff that seeks a different remedy from that sought in the class action should not be barred from asserting claims by the statute of limitations.”
Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wisconsin v. Marshfield Clinic, 881 F. Supp. 1309 (W.D. Wis. 1994). · cites it 2× “03(2), and the illegal contracts section of the Wisconsin statutes, section 133.14. Jurisdiction exists pursuant to 15 U.”
In Re West. States Wholesale Nat. Gas Antitrust, 619 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (D. Nev. 2008). “) The Amended Complaint asserts Defendants' contracts for the sale of natural gas made while in the conspiracy and which are related to the conspiracy are void pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 133.14 .( Id. ) Plaintiffs further allege they are entitled to recover from Defendants the…”
Arandell Corp. v. Xcel Energy Inc. (W.D. Wis. 2022). · cites it 7× “Wis. Stat. § 133.14 . Plaintiffs also seek treble damages under § 133.”
Arandell Corp. v. Xcel Energy, Inc., 619 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (D. Nev. 2008). “) The Amended Complaint asserts Defendants’ contracts for the sale of natural gas made while in the conspiracy and which are related to the conspiracy are void pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 133.14 .(M) Plaintiffs further allege they are entitled to recover from Defendants the…”
Arandell Corp. v. Xcel Energy Inc. (7th Cir. 2025). · cites it 2× “” Wis. Stat. § 133.14 . A party who made a payment under the contract may recover “any payment” made under the contract from any person who received or benefited from such payment.”
Shafer v. Bulk Petroleum Corp., 569 F. Supp. 621 (E.D. Wis. 1983). · cites it 5× “Finally, the argument is made that § 133.14, Wis.Stats., is unconstitutional.”
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.