Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 135.07 (2026)
Nonapplicability
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
135.07(1)(1) To a dealership to which a motor vehicle dealer or motor vehicle distributor or wholesaler as defined in s. 218.0101 is a party in such capacity.
135.07 AnnotationWhen a “dealer” under this chapter is also a “franchisee” under ch. 553, the commissioner of securities may deny, suspend, or revoke the franchisor’s registration or revoke its exemption if the franchisor has contracted to violate or avoid the provisions of this chapter. This chapter expresses public policy and its provisions may not be waived. 66 Atty. Gen. 11.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1979–2019 · 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). “¶32 Finally, Wis. Stat. § 135.07 must be considered. That section, entitled "Nonapplicability," lists certain parties to whom the WFDL does not apply.”
Winebow, Inc. v. Capitol-Husting Co., Inc., 914 N.W.2d 631 (Wis. 2018). “Section 135.07 declares ch. 135 inapplicable to motor vehicle dealers, insurance businesses, and door-to-door sales of goods or services.”
Bush v. Nat'l Sch. Studios, Inc., 407 N.W.2d 883 (Wis. 1987). “In addition, to enjoy the WFDL's protections, a business must not be specifically excluded by its "nonapplicability" section, sec. 135.07, Stats. [7] We turn now to the facts of this case to determine whether Bush meets these statutory requirements and is therefore a dealer…”
Al Bishop Agency, Inc. v. Lithonia-Div. of Nat'l Serv. Indus., Inc., 474 F. Supp. 828 (E.D. Wis. 1979). “Apparently Judge Gram’s reasoning is based in part upon an amendment to chapter 135, namely Wis.Stat. § 135.07(2), wherein the legislature excluded the insurance business from the statute.”
Astleford Equip. Co. v. Navistar Int'l Transp. Corp., 632 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. 2001). “…identical language, the WFDL states specifically that its provisions do not apply to motor vehicle dealerships. Wis. Stat. § 135.07 (1) (1999).”
Bush v. Nat'l Sch. Studios, Inc., 389 N.W.2d 49 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). “Section 135.07(3), Stats. We disagree. The language of the statute shall be construed according to its common and approved usage.”
Bakke Chiropractic Clinic v. Physicians Plus Ins. Corp., 573 N.W.2d 542 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “, it is nonetheless exempt from coverage under the WFDL by virtue of § 135.07(2), Stats., which provides that the WFDL does not apply "[t]o the insurance business.”
Home Prot. Servs., Inc. v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc., 348 F. Supp. 2d 1010 (E.D. Wis. 2004). “See § 135.07(3) (stating that WFDL does not apply "[w]here goods or services are marketed by a dealership on a door-to-door basis”).”
Kayser Ford, Inc. v. N. Rebuilders, Inc., 760 F. Supp. 749 (W.D. Wis. 1991). “Because of the resolution of this issue in defendant’s favor it is unnecessary to address those arguments concerning the relationship between Wisconsin Statutes §§ 135.07 and 218.01. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.”
A & B Distrib., Inc. v. Heggie's Pizza, LLC (W.D. Wis. 2019). “The court concludes on this record that no reasonable jury could conclude that a community of interest did not exist, and finds on summary judgment that the parties had a “dealership” within the meaning of the WFDL at the time their business relationship ended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 135.07(2) — 2 cases
Al Bishop Agency, Inc. v. Lithonia-Div. of Nat'l Serv. Indus., Inc., 474 F. Supp. 828 (E.D. Wis. 1979). “Apparently Judge Gram’s reasoning is based in part upon an amendment to chapter 135, namely Wis.Stat. § 135.07(2), wherein the legislature excluded the insurance business from the statute.”
Bakke Chiropractic Clinic v. Physicians Plus Ins. Corp., 573 N.W.2d 542 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “, it is nonetheless exempt from coverage under the WFDL by virtue of § 135.07(2), Stats., which provides that the WFDL does not apply "[t]o the insurance business.”
— Wis. Stat. § 135.07(3) — 2 cases
Bush v. Nat'l Sch. Studios, Inc., 389 N.W.2d 49 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). “Section 135.07(3), Stats. We disagree. The language of the statute shall be construed according to its common and approved usage.”
Home Prot. Servs., Inc. v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc., 348 F. Supp. 2d 1010 (E.D. Wis. 2004). “See § 135.07(3) (stating that WFDL does not apply "[w]here goods or services are marketed by a dealership on a door-to-door basis”).”
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.