Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 769 — UNIFORM INTERSTATE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 769.201 (2026)

Bases for jurisdiction over nonresident

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
769.201769.201 Bases for jurisdiction over nonresident.
769.201(1m)(1m) In a proceeding to establish or enforce a support order or to determine parentage of a child, a tribunal of this state may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual, or the individual’s guardian or conservator, if any of the following applies:
769.201(1m)(a)(a) The individual is personally served with a summons or other notice within this state.
769.201(1m)(b)(b) The individual submits to the jurisdiction of this state by consent, by entering a general appearance or by filing a responsive document having the effect of waiving any contest to personal jurisdiction.
769.201(1m)(c)(c) The individual resided with the child in this state.
769.201(1m)(d)(d) The individual resided in this state and provided prenatal expenses or support for the child.
769.201(1m)(e)(e) The child resides in this state as a result of the acts or directives of the individual.
769.201(1m)(f)(f) The individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this state and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse.
Down
Up
769.201(1m)(g)(g) The individual asserted parentage of a child in a declaration of paternal interest filed with the department of children and families under s. 48.025 or in a statement acknowledging paternity filed with the state registrar under s. 69.15 (3) (b) 1. or 3.
769.201(1m)(gm)(gm) The individual was conclusively determined from genetic test results to be the father under s. 767.804.
769.201(1m)(h)(h) There is any other basis consistent with the constitutions of this state and the United States for the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
769.201(2m)(2m) The bases of personal jurisdiction set forth in sub. (1m) or in any other law of this state may not be used to acquire personal jurisdiction for a tribunal of this state to modify a child support order of another state unless the requirements of s. 769.611 are met or, in the case of a foreign support order, unless the requirements of s. 769.615 are met.
769.201 HistoryHistory: 1993 a. 326; 1995 a. 27 s. 9126 (19); 2007 a. 20; 2009 a. 321; 2015 a. 82 s. 12; 2019 a. 95.
769.201 AnnotationWhen conception allegedly occurred in Florida and the non-resident alleged father visited Wisconsin only once following the birth, for an unspecified purpose, the child’s residence in the state was an insufficient contact to subject the alleged father to the court’s jurisdiction. State ex rel. N.R.Z. v. G.L.C., 152 Wis. 2d 97, 447 N.W.2d 533 (1989).
769.201 AnnotationThe predecessor of sub. (1m) (f), former s. 767.01 (2) (b), 1989 stats., did not violate the due process clause. D.M.K. v. J.B., 159 Wis. 2d 224, 464 N.W.2d 59 (Ct. App. 1990).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1998–2020 · leading case: In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 13× “He contends that if the activities in Wisconsin are family related, the six months within six years requirement of § 801.”
Paula M. S. v. Neal A. R., 593 N.W.2d 486 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 7× “, we first examine the provisions of §§ 769.201 and 801.05, Stats., to determine whether either provides a statu *84 tory basis for personal jurisdiction.”
In Re Marriage of Cepukenas v. Cepukenas, 584 N.W.2d 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “The court found that it had personal jurisdiction over Timothy, a nonresident, under § 769.201, Stats. It also concluded that Timothy was no longer a resident of *169 Virginia.”
State v. Richard L. Austin, Jr. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “The State contends that it followed all due process procedural requirements in this case, pointing to proper personal service, notice of all hearings, an opportunity to be heard, and appropriate allegations in support of a 3 Even if Austin were not domiciled in the state, WIS.”
— Wis. Stat. § 769.201(1m) — 1 case
State v. Richard L. Austin, Jr. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “The State contends that it followed all due process procedural requirements in this case, pointing to proper personal service, notice of all hearings, an opportunity to be heard, and appropriate allegations in support of a 3 Even if Austin were not domiciled in the state, WIS.”
— Wis. Stat. § 769.201(3) — 1 case
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “He contends that if the activities in Wisconsin are family related, the six months within six years requirement of § 801.”
— Wis. Stat. § 769.201(5) — 1 case
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “He contends that if the activities in Wisconsin are family related, the six months within six years requirement of § 801.”
— Wis. Stat. § 769.201(8) — 2 cases
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “He contends that if the activities in Wisconsin are family related, the six months within six years requirement of § 801.”
Paula M. S. v. Neal A. R., 593 N.W.2d 486 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “, we first examine the provisions of §§ 769.201 and 801.05, Stats., to determine whether either provides a statu *84 tory basis for personal jurisdiction.”
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.