Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 180.0854 (2026)
Court-ordered indemnification
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
180.0854(1)(1) Except as provided otherwise by written agreement between the director or officer and the corporation, a director or officer who is a party to a proceeding may apply for indemnification to the court conducting the proceeding or to another court of competent jurisdiction. Application shall be made for an initial determination by the court under s. 180.0855 (5) or for review by the court of an adverse determination under s. 180.0855 (1), (2), (3), (4) or (6). After receipt of an application, the court shall give any notice that it considers necessary.
180.0854(2)(a)(a) That the director or officer is entitled to indemnification under s. 180.0851 (1) or (2). If the court also determines that the corporation unreasonably refused the director’s or officer’s request for indemnification, the court shall order the corporation to pay the director’s or officer’s reasonable expenses incurred to obtain the court-ordered indemnification.
180.0854(2)(b)(b) That the director or officer is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnification in view of all the relevant circumstances, regardless of whether indemnification is required under s. 180.0851 (2).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2008–2010 · leading case: Ehlinger v. Hauser, 2010 WI 54 (Wis. 2010).
Ehlinger v. Hauser, 2010 WI 54 (Wis. 2010). “ś 101 In his brief in this court, Hauser contended that the circuit court ordered his indemnification under Wis. Stat. § 180.0854 (1). The record does not support this assertion.”
Ehlinger v. Hauser, 2008 WI App 123 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “That assertion overlooks the fact that, consistent with the provisions of Wis. Stat. § 180.0854 , the circuit court did in fact order that Hauser be indemnified; thus Hauser has complied with subsection 5 of § 180.”
— Wis. Stat. § 180.0854(1) — 1 case
Ehlinger v. Hauser, 2010 WI 54 (Wis. 2010). “ś 101 In his brief in this court, Hauser contended that the circuit court ordered his indemnification under Wis. Stat. § 180.0854 (1). The record does not support this assertion.”
— Wis. Stat. § 180.0854(2) — 1 case
Ehlinger v. Hauser, 2010 WI 54 (Wis. 2010). “ś 101 In his brief in this court, Hauser contended that the circuit court ordered his indemnification under Wis. Stat. § 180.0854 (1). The record does not support this assertion.”
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.