Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 135.04 (2026)
Notice of termination or change in dealership
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
135.04135.04 Notice of termination or change in dealership. Except as provided in this section, a grantor shall provide a dealer at least 90 days’ prior written notice of termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or substantial change in competitive circumstances. The notice shall state all the reasons for termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or substantial change in competitive circumstances and shall provide that the dealer has 60 days in which to rectify any claimed deficiency. If the deficiency is rectified within 60 days the notice shall be void. The notice provisions of this section shall not apply if the reason for termination, cancellation or nonrenewal is insolvency, the occurrence of an assignment for the benefit of creditors or bankruptcy. If the reason for termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or substantial change in competitive circumstances is nonpayment of sums due under the dealership, the dealer shall be entitled to written notice of such default, and shall have 10 days in which to remedy such default from the date of delivery or posting of such notice.
135.04 AnnotationA grantor must give a 90-day notice when termination is for nonpayment of sums due. White Hen Pantry v. Buttke, 100 Wis. 2d 169, 301 N.W.2d 216 (1981).
135.04 AnnotationThe notice requirement of this section applies to substantial changes of circumstances of a dealership, not a dealership agreement. Actions that substantially change competitive circumstances and that are controlled by the grantor or are allowed by the dealership agreement require the statutory notice. Jungbluth v. Hometown, Inc., 201 Wis. 2d 320, 548 N.W.2d 519 (1996), 94-1523.
135.04 AnnotationSteps that the grantor requires the dealer to take in order to rectify a deficiency must be reasonable. Al Bishop Agency, Inc. v. Lithonia, 474 F. Supp. 828 (1979).
135.04 AnnotationThe notice requirement does not impermissibly burden interstate commerce. Designs in Medicine, Inc. v. Xomed, Inc., 522 F. Supp. 1054 (1981).
135.04 AnnotationRemedies for termination should be available only for unequivocal terminations of the entire relationship. Meyer v. Kero-Sun, Inc., 570 F. Supp. 402 (1983).
135.04 AnnotationThe insolvency exception to the notice requirement did not apply to insolvency that was not known to the grantor at the time of termination. Bruno Wine & Spirits v. Guimarra Vineyards, 573 F. Supp. 337 (1983).
135.04 AnnotationAssignment of a second distributor in Wisconsin did not breach the agreement or cause a substantial change in the competitive circumstances of the nonexclusive dealership agreement in violation of s. 135.03. However, the defendant’s assignment of a second distributorship was a violation of this section because it caused a substantial change in the competitive circumstances of the plaintiff’s truck blower distributorship and the defendant failed to provide the plaintiff with 90 days’ written notice. Wisconsin Compressed Air Corp. v. Gardner Denver, Inc., 571 F. Supp. 2d 992 (2008).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 66
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1976–2021 · leading case: Jungbluth v. Hometown, Inc., 548 N.W.2d 519 (Wis. 1996).
Jungbluth v. Hometown, Inc., 548 N.W.2d 519 (Wis. 1996). “'s (Hometown) violation of the 90-day notice requirement in Wis. Stat. § 135.04 1 (1993-94). 2 Finding the statute at issue to be ambiguous, the court *323 of appeals opined that the notice requirement of Wis.”
Designs in Med., Inc. v. Xomed, Inc., 522 F. Supp. 1054 (E.D. Wis. 1981). “04 of the Wisconsin Statutes does not violate the commerce clause and finds that plaintiff has succeeded in demonstrating at least a reasonable likelihood of succeeding on his claim that defendant has violated Wis.Stat. § 135.04. B. Public Interest In A1 Bishop, this Court…”
Thomas F. Benson v. City of Madison, 2017 WI 65 (Wis. 2017). “03 , differed from accrual of a cause of action under the WFDL for termination without proper written notice, see Wis. Stat. § 135.04 . Les Moise, 122 Wis.”
Wisconsin Compressed Air Corp. v. Gardner Denver, Inc., 571 F. Supp. 2d 992 (W.D. Wis. 2008). “However, defendant’s assignment of a second distributorship was a violation of Wis. Stat. § 135.04 because it caused a “substantial change in the competitive circumstances” of plaintiffs truck blower distributorship and defendant failed to provide plaintiff with 90 days’ written…”
Al Bishop Agency, Inc. v. Lithonia-Div. of Nat'l Serv. Indus., Inc., 474 F. Supp. 828 (E.D. Wis. 1979). “In terminating a dealership, the grantor must follow the procedures set forth in Wis.Stat. § 135.04, which provides: Except as provided in this section, a grantor shall provide a dealer at least 90 days’ prior written notice of termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or…”
White Hen Pantry v. Buttke, 301 N.W.2d 216 (Wis. 1981). “White Hen Pantry, the grantor, contends that if sums due under the dealership are not paid within 10 days of notice of nonpayment, the dealership is terminated at the end of the 10-day period. Gerald Buttke, the dealer, claims that notwithstanding the fact that the dealer fails…”
Lee Beverage Co. v. I.S.C. Wines of California, Inc., 623 F. Supp. 867 (E.D. Wis. 1985). “The plaintiff has further alleged that the defendants violated the notice requirements set forth in Wis.Stat. § 135.04. As recompense, the plaintiff requests both damages and injunctive relief.”
Winebow, Inc. v. Capitol-Husting Co., Inc., 914 N.W.2d 631 (Wis. 2018). “Section 135.04 imposes rules and notice deadlines for termination or changes in a dealership.”
Jungbluth v. Hometown, Inc., 531 N.W.2d 412 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “" The trial court concluded that Hometown's actions substantially changed Jungbluth's competitive circumstances and, therefore, that Hometown's failure to provide Jungbluth with 90 days' prior written notice violated § 135.04, Stats. The trial court rejected Hometown's argument…”
Kania v. Airborne Freight Corp., 300 N.W.2d 63 (Wis. 1981). “Except as provided in this section, a grantor shall provide a dealer at least 90 days’ prior written notice of termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or substantial change in competitive circumstances.”
Cent. Corp. v. Rsch. Prods. Corp., 2004 WI 76 (Wis. 2004). “Moreover, Central alleged that Research failed to provide Central with *567 notice and the opportunity to cure in violation of Wis. Stat. § 135.04 . 3 Central also petitioned for a temporary restraining order to prevent termination of the business relationship.”
Lindevig v. Dairy Equip. Co., 442 N.W.2d 504 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989). “, provides: If any grantor violates this chapter, a dealer may bring an action against such grantor in any court of competent jurisdiction for damages sustained by him as a consequence of the grantor's violation, together with the actual costs of the action, including reasonable…”
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.