Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2026)
Delays, continuances and extensions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
48.315(1)(1) The following time periods shall be excluded in computing time periods under this chapter:
48.315(1)(a)(a) Any period of delay resulting from other legal actions concerning the child or the unborn child and the unborn child’s expectant mother, including an examination under s. 48.295 or a hearing related to the mental condition of the child, the child’s parent, guardian or legal custodian or the expectant mother, prehearing motions, waiver motions and hearings on other matters.
48.315(1)(b)(b) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request of or with the consent of the child and his or her counsel or of the unborn child’s guardian ad litem.
48.315(1)(d)(d) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the representative of the public under s. 48.09 if the continuance is granted because of the unavailability of evidence material to the case when he or she has exercised due diligence to obtain the evidence and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the evidence will be available at the later date, or to allow him or her additional time to prepare the case and additional time is justified because of the exceptional circumstances of the case.
48.315(1)(f)(f) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of the child or expectant mother.
48.315(1)(fm)(fm) Any period of delay resulting from the inability of the court to provide the child with notice of an extension hearing under s. 48.365 due to the child having run away or otherwise having made himself or herself unavailable to receive that notice.
48.315(1)(g)(g) A reasonable period of delay when the child is joined in a hearing with another child as to whom the time for a hearing has not expired under this section if there is good cause for not hearing the cases separately.
48.315(1)(j)(j) A reasonable period of delay, not to exceed 20 days, in a proceeding involving the out-of-home care placement of or termination of parental rights to a child whom the court knows or has reason to know is an Indian child, resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the child’s parent, Indian custodian, or tribe to enable the requester to prepare for the proceeding.
48.315(1m)(1m) Subsection (1) (a), (d), (e), (fm), (g), and (j) does not apply to proceedings under s. 48.375 (7).
48.315(2)(2) A continuance shall be granted by the court only upon a showing of good cause in open court or during a telephone conference under s. 807.13 on the record and only for so long as is necessary, taking into account the request or consent of the district attorney or the parties and the interest of the public in the prompt disposition of cases.
48.315(2m)(2m) No continuance or extension of a time period specified in this chapter may be granted and no period of delay specified in sub. (1) may be excluded in computing a time period under this chapter if the continuance, extension, or exclusion would result in any of the following:
48.315(2m)(a)(a) The court making an initial finding under s. 48.21 (5) (b) 1. or 1m., 48.32 (1) (b) 1., 48.355 (2) (b) 6., or 48.357 (2v) (a) 1. that reasonable efforts have been made to prevent the removal of the child from the home, while assuring that the child’s health and safety are the paramount concerns, or an initial finding under s. 48.21 (5) (b) 3., 48.32 (1) (b) 2., 48.355 (2) (b) 6r., or 48.357 (2v) (a) 3. that those efforts were not required to be made because a circumstance specified in s. 48.355 (2d) (b) 1. to 5. applies, more than 60 days after the date on which the child was removed from the home.
48.315(2m)(b)(b) The court making an initial finding under s. 48.38 (5m) that the agency primarily responsible for providing services to the child has made reasonable efforts to achieve the permanency goal of the child’s permanency plan more than 12 months after the date on which the child was removed from the home or making any subsequent findings under s. 48.38 (5m) as to those reasonable efforts more than 12 months after the date of a previous finding as to those reasonable efforts.
48.315(2m)(c)(c) The court making a finding under s. 48.366 (3) (am) 3. that a person’s placement in out-of-home care under a transition-to-independent-living agreement is in the best interests of the person more than 180 days after the date on which the agreement is entered into.
48.315(3)(3) Failure by the court or a party to act within any time period specified in this chapter does not deprive the court of personal or subject matter jurisdiction or of competency to exercise that jurisdiction. Failure to object to a period of delay or a continuance waives any challenge to the court’s competency to act during the period of delay or continuance. If the court or a party does not act within a time period specified in this chapter, the court, while assuring the safety of the child, may grant a continuance under sub. (2), dismiss the proceeding without prejudice, release the child from secure or nonsecure custody or from the terms of a custody order, or grant any other relief that the court considers appropriate.
48.315 HistoryHistory: 1977 c. 354; Sup. Ct. Order, 141 Wis. 2d xiii (1987); 1987 a. 403; 1991 a. 263; 1993 a. 98; 1997 a. 292; 2001 a. 16, 109; 2007 a. 20, 199; 2009 a. 94; 2011 a. 181; 2013 a. 170; 2015 a. 55, 373.
48.315 AnnotationA trial court’s sua sponte adjournment of a fact-finding hearing beyond the 30-day limit due to a congested calendar constituted good cause under sub. (2) when the adjournment order was entered within the 30-day period. J.R. v. State, 152 Wis. 2d 598, 449 N.W.2d 52 (Ct. App. 1989).
48.315 AnnotationThe period under sub. (1) (c) includes the time required to assign a new judge, send any required notices, notify the parties, and arrange for time on the court’s calendar; applicable time limits for plea hearings apply after the assignment of the new judge. State v. Joshua M.W., 179 Wis. 2d 335, 507 N.W.2d 141 (Ct. App. 1993).
48.315 AnnotationUnder sub. (2), “on the record” does not require reporting by a court reporter. A clerk’s minutes satisfy the requirement. Waukesha County v. Darlene R., 201 Wis. 2d 633, 549 N.W.2d 489 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-1697.
48.315 AnnotationThe benefits of a pretrial are universally recognized by bench and bar such that a court need not specify the factors supporting “good cause” for a continuance of the time limits under sub. (2). Waukesha County v. Darlene R., 201 Wis. 2d 633, 549 N.W.2d 489 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-1697.
48.315 AnnotationUnder sub. (1) (a), the time limits are tolled for an examination of a parent under s. 48.295. Waukesha County v. Darlene R., 201 Wis. 2d 633, 549 N.W.2d 489 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-1697.
48.315 AnnotationThe word “continuance” in sub. (2) is sufficiently broad to encompass situations in which the fact-finding hearing is originally scheduled beyond the statutory 45-day time period. A circuit court’s schedule or lawyers’ or litigants’ difficulties in scheduling court dates may amount to good cause for extension, delay, or continuance under sub. (2). State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152, 286 Wis. 2d 143, 706 N.W.2d 257, 04-2330.
48.315 AnnotationReassignment of a case to a different judge because of docket congestion does not constitute disqualification of a judge under sub. (1) (c). Brown County v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160, 286 Wis. 2d 278, 706 N.W.2d 269, 04-1305.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1988–2024 · leading case: Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005).
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). “Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the order of the circuit court.”
State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152 (Wis. 2005). “422 (2), [2] and no exception under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 applies, the circuit court lost competency to proceed with the fact-finding hearing.”
Brown Cnty. v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160 (Wis. 2005). “A reasonable delay for the purposes of consolidation is excluded, under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (1)(g), in computing the time requirements.”
Vill. of Trempealeau v. Mikrut, 2004 WI 79 (Wis. 2004). “[4] Recent legislation may have affected the continued viability of this body of case law: Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2m)(b) (specifying that failure to comply with time limitations for continuances, extensions of time or periods of delay in Ch.”
State v. Quinsanna D., 2002 WI App 318 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “Under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2), "[a] continuance shall be granted by the court only upon a showing of good cause in open court.”
State v. Michael S., 2005 WI 82 (Wis. 2005). “365 (6), the one-year dispositional order *24 could be extended beyond 30 days and whether Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (1987-88), [22] a predecessor to Wis.”
State v. APRIL O., 2000 WI App 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “" Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2). The general requirements of § 48.”
Green Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. H.N., 469 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. 1991). “did not waive her right to object to the circuit court's lack of competency at the March 14, 1989, hearing, because H.”
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Susan P. S., 2006 WI App 100 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). “, Eire the parents of five children. On November 1, 2004, Dane County filed petitions for the termination of parental rights with respect to both parents and four of the children, Sophia S.”
In Interest of Shawn BN, 497 N.W.2d 141 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “Section 48.315(1), Stats., provides in relevant part: The following time periods shall be excluded in computing time requirements within this chapter: (c) Any period of delay caused by the disqualification of a judge.”
In Interest of Joshua MW, 507 N.W.2d 141 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “However, the legislature's enactment *343 of sec. 48.315, Stats., demonstrates its recognition that those time limits could be abused by juveniles desiring to avoid prosecution by forcing a delay and its desire to prevent such abuse.”
In Interest of GH, 441 N.W.2d 227 (Wis. 1989). “Judge Eich further found that the parties consented to a continuance as provided by sec. 48.315, Stats., tolling the limit of 30 days after the plea hearing within which the fact-finding hearing must be held, sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(1) — 11 cases
State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152 (Wis. 2005). “422 (2), [2] and no exception under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 applies, the circuit court lost competency to proceed with the fact-finding hearing.”
In Interest of Shawn BN, 497 N.W.2d 141 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “Section 48.315(1), Stats., provides in relevant part: The following time periods shall be excluded in computing time requirements within this chapter: (c) Any period of delay caused by the disqualification of a judge.”
State v. Michael S., 2005 WI 82 (Wis. 2005). “365 (6), the one-year dispositional order *24 could be extended beyond 30 days and whether Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (1987-88), [22] a predecessor to Wis.”
Green Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. H.N., 469 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. 1991). “did not waive her right to object to the circuit court's lack of competency at the March 14, 1989, hearing, because H.”
In Interest of BJN, 469 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. 1991).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(1)(a) — 1 case
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). “Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the order of the circuit court.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(1)(b) — 7 cases
State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152 (Wis. 2005). “422 (2), [2] and no exception under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 applies, the circuit court lost competency to proceed with the fact-finding hearing.”
In Re Interest of DSP, 458 N.W.2d 823 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990).
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Susan P. S., 2006 WI App 100 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). “, Eire the parents of five children. On November 1, 2004, Dane County filed petitions for the termination of parental rights with respect to both parents and four of the children, Sophia S.”
R.A.C.P. v. State, 458 N.W.2d 823 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990).
In Interest of BJN, 469 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. 1991).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(1)(c) — 1 case
Brown Cnty. v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160 (Wis. 2005). “A reasonable delay for the purposes of consolidation is excluded, under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (1)(g), in computing the time requirements.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(2) — 20 cases
State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152 (Wis. 2005). “422 (2), [2] and no exception under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 applies, the circuit court lost competency to proceed with the fact-finding hearing.”
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). “Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the order of the circuit court.”
State v. APRIL O., 2000 WI App 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “" Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2). The general requirements of § 48.”
In Interest of Jason B., 500 N.W.2d 384 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Quinsanna D., 2002 WI App 318 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “Under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2), "[a] continuance shall be granted by the court only upon a showing of good cause in open court.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(2m)(a) — 1 case
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). “Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the order of the circuit court.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(2m)(b) — 1 case
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). “Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the order of the circuit court.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(3) — 2 cases
Tina B. v. Richard H., 2014 WI App 123 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. R. A. M. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(4) — 1 case
State v. R. A. M. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(l)(a) — 1 case
Waukesha Cnty. v. DARLENE R., 549 N.W.2d 489 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(l)(b) — 6 cases
State v. Quinsanna D., 2002 WI App 318 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “Under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2), "[a] continuance shall be granted by the court only upon a showing of good cause in open court.”
State v. Robert K., 2005 WI 152 (Wis. 2005). “422 (2), [2] and no exception under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 applies, the circuit court lost competency to proceed with the fact-finding hearing.”
Green Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. H.N., 469 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. 1991). “did not waive her right to object to the circuit court's lack of competency at the March 14, 1989, hearing, because H.”
In Interest of Jason B., 500 N.W.2d 384 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).
Schoenwald ex rel. L.M.C. v. M.C., 430 N.W.2d 352 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.315(l)(c) — 3 cases
Brown Cnty. v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160 (Wis. 2005). “A reasonable delay for the purposes of consolidation is excluded, under Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (1)(g), in computing the time requirements.”
In Interest of Joshua MW, 507 N.W.2d 141 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “However, the legislature's enactment *343 of sec. 48.315, Stats., demonstrates its recognition that those time limits could be abused by juveniles desiring to avoid prosecution by forcing a delay and its desire to prevent such abuse.”
State v. APRIL O., 2000 WI App 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “" Wis. Stat. § 48.315 (2). The general requirements of § 48.”
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.