Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 601.64 (2026)
Enforcement procedure
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
601.64(1)(1) Injunctions and restraining orders. The commissioner may commence an action in circuit court in the name of the state to restrain by temporary or permanent injunction or by temporary restraining order any violation of chs. 600 to 655 or s. 149.13, 2011 stats., any rule promulgated under chs. 600 to 655, or any order issued under s. 601.41 (4). The commissioner need not show irreparable harm or lack of an adequate remedy at law in an action commenced under this subsection.
601.64(2)(2) Compulsive forfeitures. If a person does not comply with an order issued under s. 601.41 (4) within 2 weeks after the commissioner has given the person notice of the commissioner’s intention to proceed under this subsection, the commissioner may commence an action for a forfeiture in such sum as the court considers just, but not exceeding $5,000 for each day that the violation continues after the commencement of the action until judgment is rendered. No forfeiture may be imposed under this subsection if at the time the action was commenced the person was in compliance with the order, nor for any violation of an order occurring while any proceeding for judicial review of the order was pending, unless the court in which the proceeding was pending certifies that the claim of invalidity or nonapplicability of the order was frivolous or a sham. If after judgment is rendered the person does not comply with the order, the commissioner may commence a new action for a forfeiture and may continue commencing actions until the person complies. The proceeds of all actions under this subsection, after deduction of the expenses of collection, shall be paid into the common school fund of the state.
601.64(3)(a)(a) Restitutionary forfeiture. Whoever violates an effective order issued under s. 601.41 (4), any insurance statute or rule, or s. 149.13, 2011 stats., shall forfeit to the state twice the amount of any profit gained from the violation, in addition to any other forfeiture or penalty imposed.
601.64(3)(b)(b) Forfeiture for violation of order. Whoever violates an order issued under s. 601.41 (4) which is effective under s. 601.63 shall forfeit to the state not more than $1,000 for each violation. Each day that the violation continues is a separate offense.
601.64(3)(c)1.1. Whoever violates an insurance statute or rule or s. 149.13, 2011 stats., intentionally aids a person in violating an insurance statute or rule or s. 149.13, 2011 stats., or knowingly permits a person over whom he or she has authority to violate an insurance statute or rule or s. 149.13, 2011 stats., shall forfeit to the state not more than $1,000 for each violation.
601.64(3)(c)2.2. Notwithstanding subd. 1., whoever violates an insurance statute or rule, intentionally aids a person in violating an insurance statute or rule, or knowingly permits a person over whom he or she has authority to violate an insurance statute or rule shall forfeit to the state not more than $5,000 for each violation if any of the following applies:
601.64(3)(c)2.a.a. The violation specifically involves a consumer who is an adult at risk, as defined in s. 55.01 (1e).
601.64(3)(c)2.b.b. The violation specifically involves an individual who is at least 60 years of age.
601.64(3)(c)3.3. If the statute or rule violated under subd. 1. or 2. imposes a duty to make a report to the commissioner, each week of delay in complying with the duty is a new violation.
601.64(3)(d)(d) Procedure. The commissioner may order any person to pay a forfeiture imposed under this subsection or s. 601.65, which shall be paid into the common school fund. If the order is issued without a hearing, the affected person may demand a hearing under s. 601.62 (3) (a). If the person fails to request a hearing, the order is conclusive as to the person’s liability. The scope of review for forfeitures ordered is that specified under s. 227.57. The commissioner may cause action to be commenced to recover the forfeiture. Before an action is commenced, the commissioner may compromise the forfeiture.
601.64(4)(4) Criminal penalty. Whoever intentionally violates or intentionally permits any person over whom he or she has authority to violate or intentionally aids any person in violating any insurance statute or rule of this state, s. 149.13, 2011 stats., or any effective order issued under s. 601.41 (4) is guilty of a Class I felony, unless a specific penalty is provided elsewhere in the statutes. Intent has the meaning expressed under s. 939.23.
601.64(5)(5) Revocation, suspension and limitation of licenses. Whenever a licensee of the office other than an insurer, a motor club, an adjuster or an insurance intermediary persistently or substantially violates chs. 600 to 646 or an order of the commissioner under s. 601.41 (4), or if the licensee’s methods and practices in the conduct of business endanger, or financial resources are inadequate to safeguard, the legitimate interests of customers and the public, the commissioner may, after a hearing, in whole or in part revoke, suspend or limit the license.
601.64 HistoryHistory: 1971 c. 260; Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 776 (1975); 1975 c. 218, 371, 421; 1977 c. 203; 1977 c. 339 s. 43; 1979 c. 89; 1979 c. 102 ss. 78, 236 (5); 1979 c. 177; 1985 a. 29; 1987 a. 167, 247; 1989 a. 332; 1995 a. 396; 1997 a. 27, 283; 2001 a. 109; 2003 a. 261; 2005 a. 74; 2013 a. 20; 2021 a. 114; 2023 a. 212.
601.64 AnnotationLegislative Council Note on sub. (5), 1975: This amendment removes insurance intermediaries from the purview of the subsection. Under this act, revocation of an intermediary’s license will be governed by s. 628.10 (2). [Bill 16-S]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1980–2020 · leading case: Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Tower Ins., 2003 WI 46 (Wis. 2003).
Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Tower Ins., 2003 WI 46 (Wis. 2003). “The Wisconsin Administrative Code contains insurance rules that prohibit unfair settlement practices, including the "[f]ailure to attempt in good faith to effectuate fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear." Wis. Admin.”
Wisconsin Med. Soc'y, Inc. v. Morgan, 2010 WI 94 (Wis. 2010). “23 (7). The board that granted the health care provider his or her license may suspend *480 or refuse to issue or renew the license if the health care provider does not participate in the Fund.”
Robert L. Kimble v. Land Concepts, Inc., 2014 WI 21 (Wis. 2014). “§ 601.64 (4). The Stevensons argue that First American violated Wis.”
Grams v. Boss, 294 N.W.2d 473 (Wis. 1980). “1973, and may seek court assistance in obtaining compliance with an order, sec. 601.64, Stats. 1973. Sec. 601.64, Stats.”
Kranzush v. Badger State Mut. Cas. Co., 307 N.W.2d 256 (Wis. 1981). “" Subsection (5) provides that violations of subsection (3) (a) subject the insurer to possible license revocation as well as the enforcement procedures under sec. 601.64, Stats. Unlike the general expression of legislative purpose contained in sec.”
Magyar v. Wisconsin Health Care Liab. Ins. Plan, 2001 WI 41 (Wis. 2001). “In particular, the legislature authorized the commissioner to apply enforcement procedures and penalties under Wis. Stat. § 601.64 for such violations. 2 We must presume that the legislature was aware that such sanctions were available to the commissioner when it promulgated Wis.”
Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins., 978 F.3d 287 (7th Cir. 1992). “11(3)(a)4, which makes it an “unfair practice” for an insurer to fail “to attempt in good faith to effectuate fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear.” The Supreme Court of Wisconsin held that enforcement of administrative…”
State ex rel. Wisconsin Employers Ins. v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins., 363 N.W.2d 685 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “Section 601.64(2), Stats. We reject the commissioner’s argument that the court’s sec.”
Mark S. Diamond v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 601.64(3)(a), which reads: “Restitutionary forfeiture.”
Marino v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 308 F. Supp. 2d 906 (E.D. Wis. 2003). “Wis. Stat. § 601.64 provides that the Wisconsin insurance commissioner may commence actions in state court to secure equitable relief.”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(2) — 1 case
State ex rel. Wisconsin Employers Ins. v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins., 363 N.W.2d 685 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “Section 601.64(2), Stats. We reject the commissioner’s argument that the court’s sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(3) — 1 case
State ex rel. Wisconsin Employers Ins. v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins., 363 N.W.2d 685 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “Section 601.64(2), Stats. We reject the commissioner’s argument that the court’s sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(3)(a) — 1 case
Mark S. Diamond v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 601.64(3)(a), which reads: “Restitutionary forfeiture.”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(3)(b) — 1 case
Mark S. Diamond v. Off. of the Comm'r of Ins. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 601.64(3)(a), which reads: “Restitutionary forfeiture.”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(3)(c) — 1 case
Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins., 978 F.3d 287 (7th Cir. 1992). “11(3)(a)4, which makes it an “unfair practice” for an insurer to fail “to attempt in good faith to effectuate fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear.” The Supreme Court of Wisconsin held that enforcement of administrative…”
— Wis. Stat. § 601.64(4) — 1 case
Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Tower Ins., 2003 WI 46 (Wis. 2003). “The Wisconsin Administrative Code contains insurance rules that prohibit unfair settlement practices, including the "[f]ailure to attempt in good faith to effectuate fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear." Wis. Admin.”
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.