Wis. Stat. § 63.15

Existing officers and employees, how affected

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

63.1563.15 Existing officers and employees, how affected.

63.15(1)(1) In a county where ss. 63.01 to 63.16 go into effect after March 14, 1984:

63.15(1)(a)(a) The commission shall administer a noncompetitive examination to any person who is appointed by the county for a definite term, who is included within the classified service of the county on the date that ss. 63.01 to 63.16 go into effect in the county and who has been in service and on the payroll of the county less than 4 years preceding that date. The person shall retain his or her position if the commission determines, based on the person’s performance on the examination, that the person is qualified for the position.

63.15(1)(b)(b) Any person who is included within the classified service appointed by the county for a definite term, who is included within the classified service of the county on the date that ss. 63.01 to 63.16 go into effect in the county and who has been in service and on the payroll of the county continuously for at least the 4 years immediately preceding that date shall retain his or her position without any examination.

63.15(2)(2) If a department, unit or other established entity and its employees are brought into the county service in a county in which ss. 63.01 to 63.16 are in effect, any employee in a position required to be in classified service shall retain his or her position if the person takes a noncompetitive examination and if the commission determines, based on the examination, that the person is qualified for the position.

63.15(3)(3) No provision of this section prevents suspension, demotion or discharge of any employee subject to ss. 63.01 to 63.16 under s. 63.10 or an applicable collective bargaining agreement.

63.15 HistoryHistory: 1983 a. 148; 1987 a. 153.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1928–2024 · leading case: Gentilli v. Board of the Police & Fire Commissioners

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gentilli v. Board of the Police & Fire Commissioners (2004) wis · cites it 2× “First, the legislature has given no indication in amending the one sentence in the text of Wis. Stat. § 63.15 (5)(i) and adding the paragraph (em) standards for just cause that it intended to further limit or eliminate the common law writ of certiorari.”

Van Gilder v. City of Madison (1936) wis “Sec. 63.15, Stats., provided for the submission to the electorate of a city of the question of whether the city should adopt a commission form of government.”

Gentilli v. BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS (2004) wis · cites it 2× “¶ 32 First, the legislature has given no indication in amending the one sentence in the text of Wis. Stat. § 63.15 (5)(i) and adding the paragraph (em) standards for just cause that it intended to further limit or eliminate the common law writ of certiorari.”

State ex rel. Sleeman v. Baxter (1928) wis · cites it 2× “On the 5th day of May, 1927, there was filed in the office of the city clerk a petition duly and sufficiently signed, under the provisions of sec. 63.15, Stats., to arouse the duty of the mayor to submit to the electors the question, “Shall the council of the city of Superior be…”

Haffner, Richard v. The City of New Richmond Police and Fire Commission (2024) wiwd · cites it 2× “Wis. Stat. § 63.15 (5); Dixon, 334 F.3d at 694 ; Kraus, 2003 WI 51 , ¶ 57.”

Haffner, Robin v. Bell, Joshua (2024) wiwd · cites it 2× “Haffner asserts only that “[b]y the summer of 2021, it was clearly established that . . . due process was required if a fire officer were to be demoted.”

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.