Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 2 — DIVISION OF THE STATE INTO COUNTIES, AND THEIR BOUNDARIES
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 2.04 (2026)

Jurisdiction of counties on boundary lakes and state boundary waters

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
2.042.04 Jurisdiction of counties on boundary lakes and state boundary waters. The counties now or hereafter organized upon the westerly shore of Lake Michigan shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on the lake. The counties now or hereafter organized on the shores of Green Bay shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on Green Bay. The counties now or hereafter organized on the southerly shore of Lake Superior shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on the lake. The counties now or hereafter organized on the easterly shore of the Mississippi River shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on the river. The counties now or hereafter organized on the shores of Lake Winnebago shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on any part of the lake. The counties now or hereafter organized on the easterly shore of the St. Croix River or lake shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on any part of the river or lake; when 2 or more counties are now or hereafter organized on the shores of any inland water of this state, as defined in s. 29.001 (45), the counties shall have jurisdiction in common of all offenses committed on any part of the inland water; and all offenses committed against this state on any part of the waters may be heard and tried in any of the counties having common jurisdiction over the waters where the offense may be committed in which legal process against the offender is first served and may be alleged and shall be conclusively deemed to have been committed within the county; and all civil process from any of the counties may be executed within and upon the waters that are within the jurisdiction of the county. In the construction of this section all wharves and piers are part of the land with which they are connected.
Down
Up
2.04 HistoryHistory: 1983 a. 27 s. 2202 (38); 1997 a. 248.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. Jones, 2010 WI 72 (Wis. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Jones, 2010 WI 72 (Wis. 2010). · cites it 5× “In other words, Jones argues, the existence of PD § 2.04 puts defendants with retained and with appointed counsel on the same footing.”
Dennis A. Teague v. Brad D. Schimel, 2017 WI 56 (Wis. 2017). · cites it 2× “Code Adm § 2.04 (prohibiting discrimination against persons with conviction or arrest records when using state office buildings and facilities for government business, public meetings, or civic activities).”
Derrick A. Sanders v. State of Wisconsin Claims Bd., 2023 WI 60 (Wis. 2023). “" See Wisconsin Bill Drafting Manual, § 2.04(5) ("Avoid using synonyms. Use different words for different meanings and the same word when the same meaning is intended.”
Gaylor v. Thompson, 939 F. Supp. 1363 (W.D. Wis. 1996). · cites it 4× “Requests for additional banners were expected and the department concluded that too many banners would further clutter the rotunda to the disappointment of thousands of people who visit the Capitol during the holiday season____ The permit you received to place the banner in the…”
First Wisconsin Bankshares Corp. v. United States, 369 F. Supp. 1034 (E.D. Wis. 1973). · cites it 2× “*1039 The government maintains that § 2.04, Rev.Proc. 66-49, 1966-2 Cum. Bull.”
State v. Beck, 555 N.W.2d 145 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “" Under § 2.04, Stats., Crawford County has jurisdiction in common over all offenses committed on the Mississippi River.”
Kissick v. Huebsch, 956 F. Supp. 2d 981 (W.D. Wis. 2013). · cites it 2× “, at § 2.04(1).) Members of the public seeking to use the building for such activities are instructed to “complete a written application to the department at least 72 hours in advance.”
Connexus Credit Union v. First & Peoples Bank & Trust Co. & Thread Bank (W.D. Wis. 2026). · cites it 5× “But Connexus clings to the default loss provision, § 2.04, which by its terms suggests that under some circumstances the banks must swap in performing loans and leases for the defaulted ones.”
Magray v. Shalala, 880 F. Supp. 1278 (E.D. Wis. 1995). · cites it 2× “Based on the vocational evidence and Section 2.04 of Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations No.”
N. Elec., Inc. v. Local Union 158, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 387 F. Supp. 2d 916 (E.D. Wis. 2005). “(CBA § 2.04.) In the event the Labor-Management Committee fails to agree or to adjust any matter, it is then referred to the CIR.”
— Wis. Stat. § 2.04(1) — 1 case
Kissick v. Huebsch, 956 F. Supp. 2d 981 (W.D. Wis. 2013). “, at § 2.04(1).) Members of the public seeking to use the building for such activities are instructed to “complete a written application to the department at least 72 hours in advance.”
— Wis. Stat. § 2.04(2) — 1 case
Kissick v. Huebsch, 956 F. Supp. 2d 981 (W.D. Wis. 2013). “, at § 2.04(1).) Members of the public seeking to use the building for such activities are instructed to “complete a written application to the department at least 72 hours in advance.”
— Wis. Stat. § 2.04(5) — 1 case
Derrick A. Sanders v. State of Wisconsin Claims Bd., 2023 WI 60 (Wis. 2023). “" See Wisconsin Bill Drafting Manual, § 2.04(5) ("Avoid using synonyms. Use different words for different meanings and the same word when the same meaning is intended.”
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.