Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 32.04 (2026)

Procedure in condemnation

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
32.0432.04Procedure in condemnation. All acquisition of property in this state by condemnation, except as hereinafter provided, commenced after April 6, 1960 shall be accomplished in the following manner:
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1923–2026 · leading case: City of Madison v. Tiedeman, 83 N.W.2d 694 (Wis. 1957).
City of Madison v. Tiedeman, 83 N.W.2d 694 (Wis. 1957). · cites it 4× “Sec. 32.04, Stats., provides for the presentation of a petition by a person desiring to acquire property by condemnation to either the county or circuit judge of the county where the property is situated.”
State Ex Rel. Gilboy v. Circuit Court for Waukesha Cnty., 349 N.W.2d 712 (Wis. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “3 Section 32.04, Stats. (1945), provided in part as follows: Any person desiring to acquire any property by condemnation shall present a verified petition therefor to the county or circuit judge of the county where such property is situated.”
Olen v. Waupaca Cnty., 300 N.W. 178 (Wis. 1941). · cites it 3× “The record discloses that the parties and their attorneys, as well as the county judge and also the circuit judge, evidently overlooked the legal nature and effect of condemnation proceedings instituted under sec. 32.04, Stats., by the filing of a petition addressed to- a county…”
Henry S. Cooper, Inc. v. Town of Pleasant Prairie, 2 N.W.2d 866 (Wis. 1942). · cites it 2× “A proceeding under ch. 32, Stats., entitled “Eminent domain,” is a special proceeding.”
Negus v. Madison Gas & Elec. Co., 331 N.W.2d 658 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “381, 381 (1928), held that because the activities of a public utility possessing condemnation power effected a “taking” of an interest in land, the landowner’s sole remedy was an action in inverse condemnation under sec. 32.04, Stats. 1927, now sec. 32.10. Zombkowski v.”
Hasslinger v. Vill. of Hartland, 290 N.W. 647 (Wis. 1940). “In the latter case it was said: “The damages, the right to which is asserted by plaintiffs, being caused by that which, in law, under such a situation, must be deemed a taking of the property rights of plaintiffs, and within sec. 32.04, Stats. . . . “There being such a statutory…”
Klump v. Cybulski, 81 N.W.2d 42 (Wis. 1957). “Without passing on the strict propriety of the withdrawal and new filing as a matter of procedure, we hold that Judge O’Neill had jurisdiction to entertain and act upon the second petition, and that there was no error in doing so which can impair the validity of his appointment…”
Konrad v. State, 91 N.W.2d 203 (Wis. 1958). “Sec. 32.04, Stats., contains this language: “.”
Skalicky v. Friendship Elec. Light & Power Co., 214 N.W. 388 (Wis. 1927). “Sec. 32.04, Stats., provides two separate and distinct methods by which condemnation proceedings may be started: First, the manner in which one who seeks to acquire property belonging to another shall proceed; and then— Second, the manner in which the owners of the property,…”
Revival Ctr. Tabernacle of Battle Creek v. City of Milwaukee, 227 N.W.2d 694 (Wis. 1975). · cites it 2× “a petition by a municipality under sec. 32.04, Stats., is not demurrable. ..”
Vivid, Inc. v. Fiedler, 497 N.W.2d 153 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The provision authorizing a property owner to maintain an inverse condemnation proceeding was contained in the same section, sec. 32.04, Stats. (1919), prescribing the procedure to be followed by a person desiring to acquire property by condemnation.”
Benka v. Consol. Water Power Co., 224 N.W. 718 (Wis. 1929). “The damages, the right to which is asserted by plaintiffs, being caused by that which, in law, under such a situation, must be deemed a taking of the property rights of plaintiffs, and within sec. 32.04, Stats., which provides two distinct methods for the commencing of…”
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.