Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 17.09 (2026)
Removal of elective county officers
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
17.0917.09 Removal of elective county officers. Elective county officers may be removed from office as follows:
17.09(1)(1) County clerk; treasurer; surveyor; supervisor. The county clerk, county treasurer or surveyor, or a county supervisor, by the county board, for cause, by a vote of two-thirds of all the supervisors entitled to seats on such board.
17.09(2)(2) Clerk of circuit court. The clerk of the circuit court, by the judge or a majority of judges of the circuit court for the clerk’s county, for cause.
17.09(5)(5) Other elective county officers. The sheriff, coroner or register of deeds, by the governor, for cause.
17.09 AnnotationRemoval is governed by s. 17.16 and contemplates a determination of cause by the board. An ordinance making a violation ipso facto cause for removal impermissibly circumvents that procedure. 66 Atty. Gen. 148.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1959–2022 · leading case: Aleman v. Milwaukee Cnty., 35 F. Supp. 2d 710 (E.D. Wis. 1999).
Aleman v. Milwaukee Cnty., 35 F. Supp. 2d 710 (E.D. Wis. 1999). “(4); Wis. Stat. §§ 17.09 (5), 17.11(1). The governor also controls the appointment of persons to fill vacant sheriff positions.”
Wellnitz v. Bd. of Police & Fire Commissioners, 444 N.W.2d 412 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989). “, governs the removal of those appointive state officers who collect, handle, or receive public moneys; sec. 17.09, Stats., governs the removal of elective county officers; sec.”
Jones Intercable v. City of Stevens Point, Wis., 729 F. Supp. 642 (W.D. Wis. 1990). “In addition, § 17.09(7) states the Grantee, by the acceptance of any franchise awarded hereunder, agrees that the matters contained in the Grantee’s application for franchise and as stated in oral presentation, except as inconsistent with the FCC Rules and Regulations, law or…”
Richard Burby v. Langlade Cnty. (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). “§ 17.09 provides that a county supervisor may be removed “for cause.”
Sukowatey, Gary v. St. Croix Cnty. (W.D. Wis. 2021). “) The court’s order further directed Loberg to visit the Property, consult with the County and the Sukowateys to determine which items on the Property were junk “as defined by Section 17.09 of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances,” and report to the court the junk items to be…”
State Ex Rel. Brunkhorst v. Krenn, 98 N.W.2d 394 (Wis. 1959). “03 or sec. 17.09, Stats. The trial court determined that a vacancy in the office of the register of deeds of Fond du Lac county resulted from the provisions of sec.”
Foresight, Inc. v. Babl, 565 N.W.2d 279 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “, § 17.09(9) at 17-118. We conclude that because these uses are explicitly authorized in other districts, they are necessarily prohibited where not explicitly authorized.”
St. Croix Cnty. v. Joanne M. Michaud (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). “, CODE OF ORDINANCES § 17.09(124) (Aug. 15, 2017). The Code further specifies that the term “junk” includes motor vehicles that are: (1) not currently registered; or (2) not capable of operation on public highways of Wisconsin, and that remain in that condition for more than ten…”
Miller v. Cooper, 116 F. Supp. 3d 919 (W.D. Wis. 2015). “Code UWS § 17.09 (“[T]he university may discipline a student for engaging in, attempting to engage in, or assisting others to engage in any of the following types of nonacademic conduct.”
— Wis. Stat. § 17.09(1) — 1 case
Richard Burby v. Langlade Cnty. (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). “§ 17.09 provides that a county supervisor may be removed “for cause.”
— Wis. Stat. § 17.09(124) — 1 case
St. Croix Cnty. v. Joanne M. Michaud (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). “, CODE OF ORDINANCES § 17.09(124) (Aug. 15, 2017). The Code further specifies that the term “junk” includes motor vehicles that are: (1) not currently registered; or (2) not capable of operation on public highways of Wisconsin, and that remain in that condition for more than ten…”
— Wis. Stat. § 17.09(7) — 1 case
Jones Intercable v. City of Stevens Point, Wis., 729 F. Supp. 642 (W.D. Wis. 1990). “In addition, § 17.09(7) states the Grantee, by the acceptance of any franchise awarded hereunder, agrees that the matters contained in the Grantee’s application for franchise and as stated in oral presentation, except as inconsistent with the FCC Rules and Regulations, law or…”
— Wis. Stat. § 17.09(9) — 1 case
Foresight, Inc. v. Babl, 565 N.W.2d 279 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “, § 17.09(9) at 17-118. We conclude that because these uses are explicitly authorized in other districts, they are necessarily prohibited where not explicitly authorized.”
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.