Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 766.63 (2026)
Mixed property
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
766.63(1)(1) Except as provided otherwise in ss. 766.61, 766.62, and 766.625 (2), mixing marital property with property other than marital property reclassifies the other property to marital property unless the component of the mixed property which is not marital property can be traced.
766.63(2)(2) Application by one spouse of substantial labor, effort, inventiveness, physical or intellectual skill, creativity or managerial activity to either spouse’s property other than marital property creates marital property attributable to that application if both of the following apply:
766.63 AnnotationApplying marital property presumptions and tracing principles. Lloyd v. Lloyd, 170 Wis. 2d 240, 487 N.W.2d 647 (Ct. App. 1992).
766.63 AnnotationIf tracing of the marital component of a mixed asset is established under sub. (1), reclassification does not occur. Instead, a claim for reimbursement exists in favor of the marital estate measured by the enhanced value of the asset, not the marital amounts expended. Estate of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 178 Wis. 2d 158, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Ct. App. 1993).
766.63 AnnotationUnder sub. (2), a party who applies substantial uncompensated labor to property may not recover if there is no resulting substantial appreciation. Estate of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 178 Wis. 2d 158, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Ct. App. 1993).
766.63 AnnotationExpenditures that result in the mere maintenance of property, including the payment of property taxes, do not result in marital property being created through mixing. Krueger v. Rodenberg, 190 Wis. 2d 367, 527 N.W.2d 381 (Ct. App. 1994).
766.63 AnnotationIf a nonmarital asset is mixed with marital property, tracing the nonmarital property to its nonmarital source preserves the traced component’s nonmarital status. There is no requirement that the party tracing the nonmarital component also trace the mixing of the marital component. That the marital property was used to satisfy a nonmarital debt against the property does not change the nonmarital character of the traceable property. Bille v. Zuraff, 198 Wis. 2d 867, 543 N.W.2d 568 (Ct. App. 1995), 95-0007.
766.63 AnnotationWhat Part of Yours is Mine?: The Creation of a Marital Property Ownership Interest by Improving Nonmarital Property Under Wisconsin’s Marital Property Law. Knauss. 2005 WLR 855.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Est. of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).
Est. of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The principal issues on this appeal concern the "mixed property" provisions of sec. 766.63, Stats., of Wisconsin's Marital Property Act (MPA).”
Krueger v. Rodenberg, 527 N.W.2d 381 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “Krueger commenced this action seeking a declaration that the real estate was marital property under the "mixing" statute, § 766.63(1), STATS., [2] because, after the effective date of the Act (January 1, 1986), annual real estate taxes on the property had been paid from joint…”
Bille v. Zuraff, 543 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “We are satisfied that John is not entitled to any further reimbursements from the estate under either a § 766.63, Stats., mixed industry or a Kobylski enhanced value analysis.”
In Matter of Est. of Lloyd, 487 N.W.2d 644 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 766.63(1), Stats. If during the marriage and after the determination date an asset constituting predetermination date property is sold and the proceeds reinvested, the newly acquired asset also is predetermination date property.”
Steinmann v. Steinmann, 2008 WI 43 (Wis. 2008). “Also compare Wis. Stat. § 766.63 (1) (mixing separate and marital property in some cases "reclassifies the other property to marital property unless the component of the mixed property which is not marital property can be traced") with Wis.”
In Re Czerneski, 330 B.R. 240 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2005). “Rodenberg, confronted the issue head-on: “[w]hether the fact that real estate taxes assessed on [individual] property were paid from joint funds in the years following the passage of the [Marital Property] Act constitutes a ‘mixing’ of nonmarital and marital property within the…”
In re Landsinger, 490 B.R. 827 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2012). “” Wis. Stat. § 766.63 (1). Mixing can also occur when there is an appreciation in value due to “substantial labor, effort, inventiveness, physical or intellectual skill, creativity or managerial activity.”
United States v. Wahlen, 459 F. Supp. 2d 800 (E.D. Wis. 2006). “2d 647 ; Wis. Stat. 766.63(1). During a July 14, 2005, hearing, this court ruled that $12,320.”
In Re Sanderfoot, 83 B.R. 564 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1988). “Wis.Stat. § 766.63. 2 Taken together, these considerations warrant application of the Boyd v.”
In re Roen, 556 B.R. 401 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2016). “” Wis. Stat. § 766.63 (1). Using marital funds to pay down the purchase price of an individually-owned piece of real estate would make the real estate community property, “but only to the extent and in the proportion that the purchase price is contributed by the community.”
Rinehart v. Meek (In Re Grady), 128 B.R. 462 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1991). “See § 766.63 Wis. *465 Stat. He also fails to consider Meek and Grady’s marital property agreement.”
In Re Marriage of Haldemann, 426 N.W.2d 107 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988). “See sec. 766.63(2), Stats. As we have previously recognized, an asset may be part separate property of one spouse and part of the marital estate subject to division.”
— Wis. Stat. § 766.63(1) — 7 cases
Est. of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The principal issues on this appeal concern the "mixed property" provisions of sec. 766.63, Stats., of Wisconsin's Marital Property Act (MPA).”
Krueger v. Rodenberg, 527 N.W.2d 381 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “Krueger commenced this action seeking a declaration that the real estate was marital property under the "mixing" statute, § 766.63(1), STATS., [2] because, after the effective date of the Act (January 1, 1986), annual real estate taxes on the property had been paid from joint…”
Bille v. Zuraff, 543 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “We are satisfied that John is not entitled to any further reimbursements from the estate under either a § 766.63, Stats., mixed industry or a Kobylski enhanced value analysis.”
In Matter of Est. of Lloyd, 487 N.W.2d 644 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 766.63(1), Stats. If during the marriage and after the determination date an asset constituting predetermination date property is sold and the proceeds reinvested, the newly acquired asset also is predetermination date property.”
In Re Czerneski, 330 B.R. 240 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2005). “Rodenberg, confronted the issue head-on: “[w]hether the fact that real estate taxes assessed on [individual] property were paid from joint funds in the years following the passage of the [Marital Property] Act constitutes a ‘mixing’ of nonmarital and marital property within the…”
— Wis. Stat. § 766.63(2) — 7 cases
Est. of Kobylski v. Hellstern, 503 N.W.2d 369 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The principal issues on this appeal concern the "mixed property" provisions of sec. 766.63, Stats., of Wisconsin's Marital Property Act (MPA).”
In Matter of Est. of Lloyd, 487 N.W.2d 644 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 766.63(1), Stats. If during the marriage and after the determination date an asset constituting predetermination date property is sold and the proceeds reinvested, the newly acquired asset also is predetermination date property.”
Bille v. Zuraff, 543 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “We are satisfied that John is not entitled to any further reimbursements from the estate under either a § 766.63, Stats., mixed industry or a Kobylski enhanced value analysis.”
Krueger v. Rodenberg, 527 N.W.2d 381 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “Krueger commenced this action seeking a declaration that the real estate was marital property under the "mixing" statute, § 766.63(1), STATS., [2] because, after the effective date of the Act (January 1, 1986), annual real estate taxes on the property had been paid from joint…”
In re Roen, 556 B.R. 401 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2016). “” Wis. Stat. § 766.63 (1). Using marital funds to pay down the purchase price of an individually-owned piece of real estate would make the real estate community property, “but only to the extent and in the proportion that the purchase price is contributed by the community.”
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.