Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2026)
Civil damages
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
218.0163(1)(1) Without exhausting any administrative remedy available under an agreement or ss. 218.0101 to 218.0163, except as provided in ss. 218.0116 (7) and (8) and 218.0134, a licensee may recover damages in a court of competent jurisdiction for pecuniary loss, together with actual costs including reasonable attorney fees, if the pecuniary loss is caused by any of the following:
218.0163(1)(a)(a) A violation by any other licensee of s. 218.0116 (1) (bm), (f), (h), (hm), (i), (km), (L), (Lm), (mm), (pm), (q), (qm), (r), (rm), (s), (sm), (t), (u), (um), (v), (vm), (w), (wm), (x), (xm), (y), (ym), (ys), or (z).
218.0163(1)(b)(b) Any unfair practice found by a licensor or the division of hearings and appeals under s. 218.0152 (1).
218.0163(1)(c)(c) An affected grantor’s disapproval of a proposed action under s. 218.0134 (2) (b), if the division of hearings and appeals has determined that there is not good cause for not permitting the proposed action to be undertaken following a hearing under s. 218.0134 (2) (c). A dealer may recover under this paragraph even if the affected grantor complies with the order of the division of hearings and appeals under s. 218.0134 (3) (b). If a dealer recovers damages for pecuniary loss, actual costs under this paragraph also include actual costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the dealer in obtaining the division of hearings and appeals’ determination of good cause.
218.0163(1m)(1m) If a court finds that a violation or practice described in sub. (1) (a) or (b) is willful, a licensee shall recover damages in an amount equal to 3 times the pecuniary loss, together with actual costs including reasonable attorney fees.
218.0163(1q)(1q) In any action brought under this subsection, the burden of proof as to liability shall be the same as set forth in ss. 218.0114 (7) (d), 218.0116 (7) (b), and 218.0116 (8) (b) regarding complaints brought before the division of hearings and appeals, but the burden of proof as to damages shall be on the licensee seeking damages.
218.0163(1r)(1r) For purposes of subs. (1) and (1m), “licensee” means a person or entity holding a license at the time the cause of action arose regardless of whether the person or entity holds a license at the time an action under this section is commenced.
218.0163(2)(2) Any retail buyer, lessee or prospective lessee suffering pecuniary loss because of a violation by a licensee of s. 218.0116 (1) (bm), (c), (cm), (dm), (e), (em), (f), (im), (m) or (p) may recover damages for the loss in any court of competent jurisdiction together with costs, including reasonable attorney fees.
218.0163(3)(3) A complainant or petitioner who prevails against a manufacturer, importer, or distributor as a result of a complaint or petition filed with the division of hearings and appeals based on an alleged violation of ss. 218.0101 to 218.0163 or under s. 218.0116 (7) or (8) or 218.0134 shall have a cause of action against the manufacturer, importer, or distributor for reasonable expenses and attorney fees incurred by the complainant or petitioner in connection with all proceedings resulting from the complaint or petition. This subsection does not apply:
218.0163(3)(a)(a) If the division of hearings and appeals finds that the manufacturer, importer, or distributor was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award of expenses and attorney fees unjust.
218.0163(3)(b)(b) To an action or proceeding under ss. 218.0114 (7) (d), 218.0131 (3) (c), and 218.0163 (1) and (1m).
218.0163 HistoryHistory: 1999 a. 31 s. 283; 2001 a. 31; 2003 a. 77; 2005 a. 256; 2011 a. 91; 2013 a. 168 s. 21; 2019 a. 67.
218.0163 AnnotationOnly a licensee may recover under this section; a claim must be related to the scope of the license. Ford Motor Co. v. Lyons, 137 Wis. 2d 397, 405 N.W.2d 354 (Ct. App. 1987).
218.0163 AnnotationSub. (2) authorizes recovery of reasonable costs and reasonable attorney fees by retail purchasers who prevail on claims under s. 218.0116. Sub. (2) and s. 218.0116 manifest a legislative purpose to provide recovery of the reasonable expenses of the litigation, and such an interpretation is necessary to harmonize otherwise conflicting provisions of sub. (2) and s. 814.04. Recovery of only s. 814.04 enumerated costs would discourage litigants with legitimate claims from seeking relief and undermine the statute’s effectiveness in suppressing prohibited mischief. Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98, 303 Wis. 2d 258, 735 N.W.2d 93, 05-0935.
218.0163 AnnotationA dealer’s refusal to sell the manufacturer’s products after filing a complaint under s. 218.01 (2) (bd) 2. [now s. 218.0114 (7) (d)] is a violation of that provision, and consequently of s. 218.01 (3) (a) 4. [now s. 218.0116 (1) (bm)], entitling the manufacturer to treble damages under s. 218.01 (9) (am) [now this section]. American Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Bill Kummer, Inc., 65 F.3d 1381 (1995).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98 (Wis. 2007).
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98 (Wis. 2007). “46 in costs, stating that Kolupar was entitled to "taxable costs," [2] i.e., those enumerated in Wis. *97 Stat.”
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2004 WI 112 (Wis. 2004). “01 (9)(b), now renumbered as Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2). Chapter 218 of the Wisconsin Statutes regulates the automobile business in many respects.”
Lynch v. Crossroads Counseling Ctr., Inc., 2004 WI App 114 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “However, we are not aware of any reported case that has addressed the relationship of the "lodestar" approach to the application of SCR 20:1.”
Randy L. Betz v. Diamond Jim's Auto Sales, 2014 WI 66 (Wis. 2014). “§ 218.0163(2) provides, in relevant part: Any retail buyer, lessee or prospective lessee suffering pecuniary loss because of a violation by a licensee .”
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2003 WI App 175 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “01(9)(b) has been renumbered as Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2) (2001-02). We remand the matter to the clerk of the circuit court for correction of the June 24, 2002 final judgment to correspond with the language of the order for judgment dated June 6, 2002.”
Don Johnson's Haywood Motors, Inc. v. Gen. Motors LLC, 387 F. Supp. 3d 939 (W.D. Wis. 2019). “See Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (1) (providing that dealers may recover damages in court for violations of various enumerated provisions of Chapter 218).”
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2006 WI App 85 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). “01 (9)(b) (1993-94), now found at Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2). See Kolupar, 2004 WI 112, ¶ 18 , 275 Wis.”
Betz v. Diamond Jim's Auto Sales, 2012 WI App 131 (Wis. Ct. App. 2012). “The motion did not mention the fee-shifting claim under Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2). The retention agreement is between Betz and "Law Offices of Vince Megna.”
Seth H. Kiewiz v. My Custom Shop, Inc. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “” On the other hand, he observed that MCS, despite the multiple times Kiewiz returned with the vehicle with another problem, MCS continued to express a willingness to work with Kiewiz and figure out the problems, and there was no point at which MCS said it was “done” working…”
Dahl Auto. Onalaska Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. (W.D. Wis. 2022). “2 Section 218.0163(1)(a) gives dealers the right to sue over some of the conduct prohibited by § 218.”
Racine Car Dealer, LLC v. Hyundai Motor Am. (W.D. Wis. 2023). “See Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (1). If the violation is willful, the dealer is entitled to treble damages.”
River States Truck & Trailer, Inc. v. Daimler Vans USA LLC (W.D. Wis. 2021). “Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (1). If the violation is willful, the dealer is entitled to treble damages.”
— Wis. Stat. § 218.0163(1)(a) — 1 case
Dahl Auto. Onalaska Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. (W.D. Wis. 2022). “2 Section 218.0163(1)(a) gives dealers the right to sue over some of the conduct prohibited by § 218.”
— Wis. Stat. § 218.0163(1m) — 1 case
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98 (Wis. 2007). “46 in costs, stating that Kolupar was entitled to "taxable costs," [2] i.e., those enumerated in Wis. *97 Stat.”
— Wis. Stat. § 218.0163(2) — 7 cases
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98 (Wis. 2007). “46 in costs, stating that Kolupar was entitled to "taxable costs," [2] i.e., those enumerated in Wis. *97 Stat.”
Randy L. Betz v. Diamond Jim's Auto Sales, 2014 WI 66 (Wis. 2014). “§ 218.0163(2) provides, in relevant part: Any retail buyer, lessee or prospective lessee suffering pecuniary loss because of a violation by a licensee .”
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2003 WI App 175 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “01(9)(b) has been renumbered as Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2) (2001-02). We remand the matter to the clerk of the circuit court for correction of the June 24, 2002 final judgment to correspond with the language of the order for judgment dated June 6, 2002.”
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2006 WI App 85 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). “01 (9)(b) (1993-94), now found at Wis. Stat. § 218.0163 (2). See Kolupar, 2004 WI 112, ¶ 18 , 275 Wis.”
Seth H. Kiewiz v. My Custom Shop, Inc. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “” On the other hand, he observed that MCS, despite the multiple times Kiewiz returned with the vehicle with another problem, MCS continued to express a willingness to work with Kiewiz and figure out the problems, and there was no point at which MCS said it was “done” working…”
— Wis. Stat. § 218.0163(lm) — 1 case
Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc., 2007 WI 98 (Wis. 2007). “46 in costs, stating that Kolupar was entitled to "taxable costs," [2] i.e., those enumerated in Wis. *97 Stat.”
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.