Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 227.483 (2026)
Costs upon frivolous claims
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
227.483(1)(1) If a hearing examiner or the tax appeals commission finds, at any time during the proceeding, that an administrative hearing commenced or continued by a petitioner or a claim or defense used by a party is frivolous, the hearing examiner or tax appeals commission shall award the successful party the costs and reasonable attorney fees that are directly attributable to responding to the frivolous petition, claim, or defense.
227.483(2)(2) If the costs and fees awarded under sub. (1) are awarded against the party other than a public agency, those costs may be assessed fully against either the party or the attorney representing the party or may be assessed so that the party and the attorney each pay a portion of the costs and fees.
227.483(3)(3) To find a petition for a hearing or a claim or defense to be frivolous under sub. (1), the hearing examiner must find at least one of the following:
227.483(3)(a)(a) That the petition, claim, or defense was commenced, used, or continued in bad faith, solely for purposes of harassing or maliciously injuring another.
227.483(3)(b)(b) That the party or the party’s attorney knew, or should have known, that the petition, claim, or defense was without any reasonable basis in law or equity and could not be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.
227.483(3)(c)(c) If the proceeding relates to mining for ferrous minerals, as defined in s. 295.41 (18), that the petition, claim, or defense was commenced, used, or continued primarily for the purpose of causing delay to an activity authorized under a license that is the subject of the hearing.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Jay Stone v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).
Jay Stone v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n (Wis. Ct. App. 2025). “Further, he was not provided “Service of Decision” pursuant to WIS.”
Wis. Stat. § 227.483(3): 1 case
Jay Stone v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n (Wis. Ct. App. 2025). “Further, he was not provided “Service of Decision” pursuant to WIS.”
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.