Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 452.139 (2026)
Changes in common law duties and liabilities of brokers and parties
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
452.139(1)(1) Common law duties of firms. The duties of a firm specified in this chapter or in rules promulgated under this chapter shall supersede duties or obligations under common law to the extent that those common law duties or obligations are inconsistent with the duties specified in this chapter or in rules promulgated under this chapter.
452.139(2)(a)(a) A client is not liable for a misrepresentation made in connection with the provision of brokerage services by a firm or any licensee associated with the firm, unless the client knows or should have known of the misrepresentation or the firm or licensee is repeating a misrepresentation made by the client.
452.139(2)(b)(b) A firm that is providing brokerage services to a client and that retains another firm to provide brokerage services as a subagent is not liable for a misrepresentation made by the subagent or any licensee associated with the subagent, unless the firm knew or should have known of the misrepresentation or the subagent or licensee is repeating a misrepresentation made to by the firm or any licensee associated with the firm.
452.139(2)(c)(c) Nothing in this subsection limits the responsibility of a firm under s. 452.12 (3) for misrepresentations made by a licensee associated with the firm. Nothing in this subsection limits the liability of a client for a misrepresentation that the client makes in connection with brokerage services.
452.139(3)(3) Liability for negligent hiring. If a licensee associated with a firm commits a crime under the laws of this state or another wrongful act, the firm may not be held civilly liable for hiring that licensee in a claim brought for negligent hiring if, regardless of whether the firm conducted its own investigation, the firm relied on the investigations conducted by the department under s. 440.03 (13) or on any determination made by the board, including a determination under s. 111.335 (4) (f) or 452.25.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2002–2010 · leading case: Kailin v. Armstrong, 2002 WI App 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002).
Kailin v. Armstrong, 2002 WI App 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “First Weber and Carpenter argue that their duty to disclose is defined by statute, not by common law, Wis. Stat. § 452.139 (1), and they did not have a statutory duty to disclose Ring Karate's rent arrearage under Wis.”
United States v. Lupton, 620 F.3d 790 (7th Cir. 2010). “” Wis. Stat. § 452.139 (1). Likewise, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has explicitly undermined Lupton’s interpretation of Wisconsin’s open records law, Wis.”
Shister v. Patel, 2009 WI App 163 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009). “Wis. Stat. § 452.139 (1). ¶ 17. Wisconsin courts have repeatedly recognized a real estate broker's independent duty — separate and apart from any obligations or responsibilities of the seller.”
— Wis. Stat. § 452.139(1) — 1 case
United States v. Lupton, 620 F.3d 790 (7th Cir. 2010). “” Wis. Stat. § 452.139 (1). Likewise, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has explicitly undermined Lupton’s interpretation of Wisconsin’s open records law, 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.