Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 655.42 (2026)
Establishment of mediation system
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
655.42(1)(1) Legislative intent. The legislature intends that the mediation system provide the persons under sub. (2) with an informal, inexpensive and expedient means for resolving disputes without litigation and intends that the director of state courts administer the mediation system accordingly.
655.42(2)(2) Mediation system. The director of state courts shall establish a mediation system complying with this subchapter not later than September 1, 1986. The mediation system shall consist of mediation panels that assist in the resolution of disputes, regarding medical malpractice, between patients, their representatives, spouses, parents or children and health care providers.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1988–2007 · leading case: Landis v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc., 2001 WI 86 (Wis. 2001).
Landis v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc., 2001 WI 86 (Wis. 2001). “[4] *8 Wis. Stat. § 655.42 (1). Section 655.44 allows a plaintiff alleging medical malpractice to request mediation before filing an action in circuit court.”
Rouse v. Theda Clark Med. Ctr., Inc., 2007 WI 87 (Wis. 2007). “" Wis. Stat. § 655.42 (1). ¶ 94 Chapter 655 addresses the timing of the mediation vis-à-vis a "court action.”
Ocasio v. Froedtert Mem'l Lutheran Hosp., 2002 WI 89 (Wis. 2002). “655 is apparent from the statement of legislative intent in the statutes.”
Seaquist v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 531 N.W.2d 437 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “[claimants and health care providers] with an informal, inexpensive and expedient means for resolving disputes without litigation and intends that the director of state courts administer the mediation system accordingly.”
Eby v. Kozarek, 450 N.W.2d 249 (Wis. 1990). “" Section 655.42(1), Stats. We are sympathetic with that concern.”
Dippel v. Wisconsin Patients Comp. Fund, 468 N.W.2d 789 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “In such a situation, the public policy served by sec. 655.42(1), Stats., cannot come into play because the claimant has not invoked it.”
Lund v. Kokemoor, 537 N.W.2d 21 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Section 655.42, Stats. Despite the environment in which the medical malpractice statutory scheme was enacted and despite the actions taken by the legislature to reduce liability insurance costs, the plaintiffs contend that this court should conclude that punitive damages are…”
Bertorello v. St. Joseph's Hosp. of Marshfield, Inc., 685 F. Supp. 192 (W.D. Wis. 1988). “§ 655.445. In response to the filing of a request for mediation, the director of the mediation panels must appoint a mediation panel.”
Schulz v. Nienhuis, 448 N.W.2d 655 (Wis. 1989). “" Section 655.42(1), Stats. 1987-88. To this end, the statute declares that the claimant and all respondents "shall participate in mediation under this subchapter.”
Geisel v. Odulio, 807 F. Supp. 500 (W.D. Wis. 1992). “Wis.Stat. § 655.42(1). The consequence of construing the use of regular mail as a violation of the statute would result in technical denials of mediation requests and would thwart the purpose of the statute.”
Landis v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc., 2000 WI App 164 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “Section 655.42, STATS. It was consistent with the legislature's purpose to enact a statute of repose to extinguish, with certainty and without exception, a medical malpractice right of action five years after the date of the act or omission.”
Rowland v. Patterson, 882 F.2d 97 (4th Cir. 1989). “2, claimant must "notify” putative defendant of claim by mail "prior to commencing" an action, whereupon either claimant or potential defendant may then "request” medical panel review by mailing request to Chief Justice); Wis.Stat.Ann. §§ 655.42 et seq. (Supp.1988) (per § 655.”
— Wis. Stat. § 655.42(1) — 7 cases
Eby v. Kozarek, 450 N.W.2d 249 (Wis. 1990). “" Section 655.42(1), Stats. We are sympathetic with that concern.”
Seaquist v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 531 N.W.2d 437 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “[claimants and health care providers] with an informal, inexpensive and expedient means for resolving disputes without litigation and intends that the director of state courts administer the mediation system accordingly.”
Ocasio v. Froedtert Mem'l Lutheran Hosp., 2002 WI 89 (Wis. 2002). “655 is apparent from the statement of legislative intent in the statutes.”
Schulz v. Nienhuis, 448 N.W.2d 655 (Wis. 1989). “" Section 655.42(1), Stats. 1987-88. To this end, the statute declares that the claimant and all respondents "shall participate in mediation under this subchapter.”
Dippel v. Wisconsin Patients Comp. Fund, 468 N.W.2d 789 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “In such a situation, the public policy served by sec. 655.42(1), Stats., cannot come into play because the claimant has not invoked it.”
— Wis. Stat. § 655.42(2) — 2 cases
Seaquist v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 531 N.W.2d 437 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “[claimants and health care providers] with an informal, inexpensive and expedient means for resolving disputes without litigation and intends that the director of state courts administer the mediation system accordingly.”
Dippel v. Wisconsin Patients Comp. Fund, 468 N.W.2d 789 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “In such a situation, the public policy served by sec. 655.42(1), Stats., cannot come into play because the claimant has not invoked it.”
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.