Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (2026)
Public works, form of contract, bond, remedy
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
779.14(1)(1) Definition. In this section, “subcontractor, supplier, or service provider” means the following:
779.14(1)(a)(a) Any person who has a direct contractual relationship, expressed or implied, with the prime contractor or with any subcontractor of the prime contractor to perform, furnish, or procure labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications, except as provided in par. (b).
779.14(1)(b)(b) With respect to contracts entered into under s. 84.06 (2) for highway improvements, any person who has a direct contractual relationship, expressed or implied, with the prime contractor to perform, furnish, or procure labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications.
779.14(1e)(a)(a) All contracts involving $10,000 or more for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications, when the same pertains to any public improvement or public work shall contain a provision for the payment by the prime contractor of all claims for labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications performed, furnished, procured, used, or consumed that pertain to the public improvement or public work.
779.14(1e)(b)(b) All contracts that are in excess of $30,000 and that are for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications for a public improvement or public work shall contain a provision under which the prime contractor agrees, to the extent practicable, to maintain a list of all subcontractors, suppliers, and service providers performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications under the contract.
779.14(1m)(c)(c) State contracts. The following requirements apply to contracts with the state for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications for a public improvement or public work:
779.14(1m)(c)1.1. In the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $16,000 but not exceeding $148,000:
779.14(1m)(c)1.a.a. The contract shall include a provision which allows the state to make direct payment to subcontractors or to pay the prime contractor with checks that are made payable to the prime contractor and to one or more subcontractors. This subd. 1. a. does not apply to any contract entered into by the state under authority granted under chs. 84, 85 and 86. This subd. 1. a. also does not apply to any contract with a town, city, village, county or school district for the construction, improvement, extension, repair, replacement or removal of a transportation facility, as defined under s. 84.185 (1) (d); bikeway, as defined under s. 84.60 (1) (a); bridge; parking lot or airport facility.
779.14(1m)(c)1.b.b. The contract shall comply with written standards established by the department of administration. Written standards established under this subd. 1. b. shall include criteria for determining whether the contract requires payment or performance assurances and, if so, what payment or performance assurances are required.
779.14(1m)(c)2.2. In the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $148,000 but not exceeding $369,000:
779.14(1m)(c)2.a.a. The contract shall include a provision which allows the state to make direct payment to subcontractors or to pay the prime contractor with checks that are made payable to the prime contractor and to one or more subcontractors. This subd. 2. a. does not apply to any contract entered into by the state under authority granted under chs. 84, 85 and 86. This subd. 2. a. also does not apply to any contract with a town, city, village, county or school district for the construction, improvement, extension, repair, replacement or removal of a transportation facility, as defined under s. 84.185 (1) (d); bikeway, as defined under s. 84.60 (1) (a); bridge; parking lot or airport facility.
779.14(1m)(c)2.b.b. The contract shall require the prime contractor to provide a payment and performance bond meeting the requirements of par. (e), unless the department of administration allows the prime contractor to substitute a different payment assurance for the payment and performance bond. The department of administration may allow a prime contractor to substitute a different payment and performance assurance for the payment and performance bond only after the contract has been awarded and only if the substituted payment and performance assurance is for an amount at least equal to the contract price and is in the form of a bond, an irrevocable letter of credit or an escrow account acceptable to the department of administration. The department of administration shall establish written standards under this subd. 2. b. governing when a different payment and performance assurance may be substituted for a payment and performance bond under par. (e).
779.14(1m)(c)3.3. In the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $369,000 the contract shall require the prime contractor to obtain a payment and performance bond meeting the requirements under par. (e).
779.14(1m)(d)(d) Local government contracts. The following requirements apply to contracts, other than contracts with the state, for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications for a public improvement or public work:
779.14(1m)(d)1.1. In the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $16,000 but not exceeding $74,000:
779.14(1m)(d)1.a.a. The contract shall include a provision which allows the governmental body that is authorized to enter into the contract to make direct payment to subcontractors or to pay the prime contractor with checks that are made payable to the prime contractor and to one or more subcontractors. This subd. 1. a. does not apply to any contract with a town, city, village, county or school district for the construction, improvement, extension, repair, replacement or removal of a transportation facility, as defined under s. 84.185 (1) (d); bikeway, as defined under s. 84.60 (1) (a); bridge; parking lot or airport facility.
779.14(1m)(d)1.b.b. The contract shall comply with written standards established by the public body authorized to enter into the contract. Written standards established under this subd. 1. b. shall include criteria for determining whether the contract requires payment or performance assurances and, if so, what payment or performance assurances are required.
779.14(1m)(d)2.2. In the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $74,000 but not exceeding $148,000:
779.14(1m)(d)2.a.a. The contract shall include a provision which allows the governmental body that is authorized to enter into the contract to make direct payment to subcontractors or to pay the prime contractor with checks that are made payable to the prime contractor and to one or more subcontractors. This subd. 2. a. does not apply to any contract with a town, city, village, county or school district for the construction, improvement, extension, repair, replacement or removal of a transportation facility, as defined under s. 84.185 (1) (d); bikeway, as defined under s. 84.60 (1) (a); bridge; parking lot or airport facility.
779.14(1m)(d)2.b.b. Except as provided in sub. (4), the contract shall require the prime contractor to provide a payment and performance bond meeting the requirements of par. (e), unless the public body authorized to enter into the contract allows the prime contractor to substitute a different payment assurance for the payment and performance bond. The public body may allow a prime contractor to substitute a different payment and performance assurance for the payment and performance bond only if the substituted payment and performance assurance is for an amount at least equal to the contract price and is in the form of a bond, an irrevocable letter of credit or an escrow account acceptable to the public body. The public body shall establish written standards under this subd. 2. b. governing when a different payment and performance assurance may be substituted for a payment and performance bond under par. (e).
779.14(1m)(d)3.3. Except as provided in sub. (4), in the case of a contract with a contract price exceeding $148,000 the contract shall require the prime contractor to obtain a payment and performance bond meeting the requirements under par. (e).
779.14(1m)(e)2.2. A bond required under par. (c) or (d) shall carry a penalty of not less than the contract price, and shall be conditioned for all of the following:
779.14(1m)(e)2.b.b. The payment to every person, including every subcontractor, supplier, or service provider, of all claims that are entitled to payment for labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications performed, furnished, or procured for the purpose of making the public improvement or performing the public work as provided in the contract and sub. (1e) (a).
779.14(1m)(e)3.3. A bond required under par. (c) shall be approved for the state by the state official authorized to enter the contract. A bond required under par. (d) shall be approved for a county by its corporation counsel, for a city by its mayor, for a village by its president, for a town by its chairperson, for a school district by its president and for any other public board or body by the presiding officer thereof.
779.14(1m)(e)4.4. No assignment, modification or change of the contract, change in the work covered thereby or extension of time for the completion of the contract may release the sureties on a bond required under par. (c) or (d).
779.14(1m)(e)5.5. Neither the invitation for bids nor the person having power to approve the prime contractor’s bond may require that a bond required under par. (c) or (d) be furnished by a specified surety company or through a specified agent or broker.
779.14(1m)(f)(f) Direct purchase contracts. Paragraphs (c) and (d) do not apply to a contract for the direct purchase of materials by the state or by a local unit of government.
779.14(2)(a)(a) Except as provided in par. (am), no later than one year after the completion of work under the contract, any party in interest, including any subcontractor, supplier, or service provider, may maintain an action in that party’s name against the prime contractor and the sureties upon the bond for the recovery of any damages sustained by reason of any of the following:
779.14(2)(a)2.2. Except as provided in subd. 3., failure of the prime contractor or a subcontractor of the prime contractor to comply with a contract, whether express or implied, with a subcontractor, supplier, or service provider for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications for the purpose of making the public improvement or performing the public work that is the subject of the contract with the governmental entity.
779.14(2)(a)3.3. With respect to contracts entered into under s. 84.06 (2) for highway improvements, failure of the prime contractor to comply with a contract, whether express or implied, with a subcontractor, supplier, or service provider of the prime contractor for performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications for the purpose of making the highway improvement that is the subject of the contract with the governmental entity.
779.14(2)(am)1.1. Except as provided in subd. 2., a subcontractor, supplier, or service provider may maintain an action under par. (a) only if the subcontractor, supplier, or service provider has served a written notice on the prime contractor that the subcontractor, supplier, or service provider has performed, furnished, or procured, or will perform, furnish, or procure labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications to the public work or improvement. The notice must be served no later than 60 days after the date on which the subcontractor, supplier, or service provider first performed, furnished, or procured the labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications.
779.14(2)(am)2.a.a. The contract for performing, furnishing, or procuring the labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications does not exceed $5,000.
779.14(2)(am)2.b.b. The action is brought by an employee of the prime contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or service provider.
779.14(2)(am)2.c.c. The subcontractor, supplier, or service provider is listed in the list required to be maintained under sub. (1e) (b) or in a written contract, or in a document appended to a written contract, between a subcontractor, supplier, or service provider and the prime contractor.
779.14(2)(b)(b) If the amount realized on the bond is insufficient to satisfy all claims of the parties in full, it shall be distributed among the parties proportionally.
779.14(3)(3) Actions by a county. In an action by a county upon the bond all persons for whose protection it was given and who make claim thereunder may be joined in the action. The county highway commissioner may take assignments of all demands and claims for labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications and enforce the same in the action for the benefit of the assignors, and the judgment may provide the manner in which the assignors shall be paid.
779.14(4)(4) Bonding exemption. A contract with a local professional football stadium district under subch. IV of ch. 229 is not required under sub. (1m) (d) 2. b. or 3. to include a provision requiring the prime contractor to provide or obtain a payment and performance bond or other payment assurance.
779.14 HistoryHistory: 1973 c. 90; 1975 c. 147 s. 54; 1975 c. 224; 1977 c. 418; 1979 c. 32 s. 57; 1979 c. 110 s. 60 (12); 1979 c. 176; Stats. 1979 s. 779.14; 1985 a. 225; 1987 a. 399; 1989 a. 31, 290; 1995 a. 395, 432; 1997 a. 27, 39, 237; 1999 a. 167; 2005 a. 204; 2013 a. 173 s. 33; 2017 a. 59.
779.14 AnnotationA subcontractor can maintain an action against the prime contractor and the prime contractor’s surety if the claim is brought within one year after completion of work on the principal contract. Honeywell, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 52 Wis. 2d 425, 190 N.W.2d 499 (1971).
779.14 AnnotationIn a complaint seeking to foreclose a construction lien on a municipal arena, an allegation that the lessee of the arena was acting as the city’s agent in contracting for improvements to the arena was sufficient to withstand a demurrer. James W. Thomas Construction Co. v. City of Madison, 79 Wis. 2d 345, 255 N.W.2d 551 (1977).
779.14 AnnotationThe liability of a prime contractor for damages to employees of a subcontractor under sub. (2) did not include wage penalties under s. 66.293 (3) [now s. 66.0903 (3)]. Consent to be a named party under s. 66.293 (3) [now s. 66.0903 (3)] may occur after one year when the action is for damages under s. 66.293 [now s. 66.0903] in the name of the plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees and was filed within the one-year time period. Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 184 Wis. 2d 619, 516 N.W.2d 719 (1994).
779.14 AnnotationA prime contractor is responsible for and must provide a bond in the amount of its own contract, not in the amount of the total of all prime contractors together. Golden Valley Supply Co. v. American Insurance Co., 195 Wis. 2d 866, 537 N.W.2d 58 (Ct. App. 1995), 95-0357.
779.14 AnnotationCompletion of work under a contract under sub. (2) occurs when a contractor has completed the work, not when the work is accepted. Arbor Vitae-Woodruff Joint School District No. 1 v. Gulf Insurance Co., 2002 WI App 24, 250 Wis. 2d 637, 639 N.W.2d 788, 01-0993.
779.14 AnnotationThe deletion of former sub. (1m) (b) 1., 1995 stats., which specifically required a municipality to require a prime contractor to furnish a bond, did not eliminate municipal liability in the event the municipality fails to ensure the existence of a contractor’s bond. Holmen Concrete Products Co. v. Hardy Construction Co., 2004 WI App 165, 276 Wis. 2d 126, 686 N.W.2d 705, 03-3335.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1983–2016 · leading case: Golden Valley Supply Co. v. Am. Ins., 537 N.W.2d 58 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995).
Golden Valley Supply Co. v. Am. Ins., 537 N.W.2d 58 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Thus, Golden Valley filed suit on the bond issued by American for the full amount owed, contending that Golden Valley was the school district's supplier and that Tom-linson was liable to Golden Valley for all claims of labor and materials as a prime contractor of the project,…”
James Cape & Sons Co. v. Bowles (In Re Bowles), 318 B.R. 129 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2004). “14(l)(c), describes payment and performance assurance requirements for contracts with the state of Wisconsin for a public improvement or public work, and subsection 779.”
Waukesha Concrete Prods. Co. v. Capitol Indem. Corp., 379 N.W.2d 333 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “Furthermore, we find nothing in sec. 779.14, Stats., which precludes such an interpretation.”
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 516 N.W.2d 719 (Wis. 1994). “The employes, plaintiffs, also relied upon sec. 779.14, Stats., the bond statute, particularly on the portion of sec.”
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 507 N.W.2d 159 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contend that sec. 779.14, Stats. (1989-90), which allowed the employees of a subcontractor to maintain an action against the prime contractor and its surety, did not grant those employees the right to pursue the punitive double wage, fees and costs provisions…”
In Matter of Liquidation of Wis. Sur., 330 N.W.2d 768 (Wis. 1983). “The issue of the case is whether under sec. 779.14(1), Stats., 1 a supplier who provides *196 materials which are used or consumed in the performance of a bonded public improvement contract is entitled to recover against the surety where the materials were provided initially…”
Arbor Vitae-Woodruff Jt. Sch. Dist. No.1 v. Gulf Ins. Co., 2002 WI App 24 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “On January 3, 2000, Gulfs attorney sent a letter to the district denying liability under the surety bond, claiming that the one-year statute of limitations under Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (2) had expired. The district filed an action requesting declaratory relief on February 7, 2000.”
Nagle Hart, Inc. v. United Pac. Ins., 417 N.W.2d 36 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987). “Pursuant to sec. 779.14, Stats. 1981, ACG gave the city a payment bond issued by United Pacific.”
Holmen Concrete Prods. Co. v. Hardy Constr. Co., 2004 WI App 165 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “15 , and claims for damages stemming from the Village's failure to require Hardy to furnish a payment and performance bond as required by Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (lm). ¶ 6. The Village filed a motion for summary judgment contending that Holmen's and Iverson's claims against the…”
Town of Burnside v. City of Indep., 2016 WI App 94 (Wis. Ct. App. 2016). “employees were joined by written consent more than one year after the contract was completed, and the defendants raised Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (2)(a) (1989-90), as a defense, asserting the claims of these employees were untimely.”
Arbor Vitae-woodruff Jt. Sch. Dist. v. Gulf Ins. Co., 2002 WI App 24 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “" The court said, "`Under the contract' means that the labor or material was used or consumed on the public improvement project and within the scope of the particular prime contract which the surety company bonded.”
Milwaukee Bd. of Sch. Directors v. BITEC, Inc., 2009 WI App 155 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009). “While we acknowledge this is not a clear-cut case, we believe MBSD's reading best comports with the principles of suretyship law and the contract terms as they are written.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(1) — 3 cases
In Matter of Liquidation of Wis. Sur., 330 N.W.2d 768 (Wis. 1983). “The issue of the case is whether under sec. 779.14(1), Stats., 1 a supplier who provides *196 materials which are used or consumed in the performance of a bonded public improvement contract is entitled to recover against the surety where the materials were provided initially…”
Nagle Hart, Inc. v. United Pac. Ins., 417 N.W.2d 36 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987). “Pursuant to sec. 779.14, Stats. 1981, ACG gave the city a payment bond issued by United Pacific.”
Arbor Vitae-woodruff Jt. Sch. Dist. v. Gulf Ins. Co., 2002 WI App 24 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “" The court said, "`Under the contract' means that the labor or material was used or consumed on the public improvement project and within the scope of the particular prime contract which the surety company bonded.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(1m)(a) — 1 case
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 516 N.W.2d 719 (Wis. 1994). “The employes, plaintiffs, also relied upon sec. 779.14, Stats., the bond statute, particularly on the portion of sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(2) — 2 cases
Arbor Vitae-Woodruff Jt. Sch. Dist. No.1 v. Gulf Ins. Co., 2002 WI App 24 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “On January 3, 2000, Gulfs attorney sent a letter to the district denying liability under the surety bond, claiming that the one-year statute of limitations under Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (2) had expired. The district filed an action requesting declaratory relief on February 7, 2000.”
Arbor Vitae-woodruff Jt. Sch. Dist. v. Gulf Ins. Co., 2002 WI App 24 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “" The court said, "`Under the contract' means that the labor or material was used or consumed on the public improvement project and within the scope of the particular prime contract which the surety company bonded.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(2)(a) — 2 cases
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 507 N.W.2d 159 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contend that sec. 779.14, Stats. (1989-90), which allowed the employees of a subcontractor to maintain an action against the prime contractor and its surety, did not grant those employees the right to pursue the punitive double wage, fees and costs provisions…”
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 516 N.W.2d 719 (Wis. 1994). “The employes, plaintiffs, also relied upon sec. 779.14, Stats., the bond statute, particularly on the portion of sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(l)(b) — 1 case
Golden Valley Supply Co. v. Am. Ins., 537 N.W.2d 58 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Thus, Golden Valley filed suit on the bond issued by American for the full amount owed, contending that Golden Valley was the school district's supplier and that Tom-linson was liable to Golden Valley for all claims of labor and materials as a prime contractor of the project,…”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(l)(c) — 1 case
James Cape & Sons Co. v. Bowles (In Re Bowles), 318 B.R. 129 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2004). “14(l)(c), describes payment and performance assurance requirements for contracts with the state of Wisconsin for a public improvement or public work, and subsection 779.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(l)(d) — 1 case
James Cape & Sons Co. v. Bowles (In Re Bowles), 318 B.R. 129 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2004). “14(l)(c), describes payment and performance assurance requirements for contracts with the state of Wisconsin for a public improvement or public work, and subsection 779.”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(lm) — 2 cases
Golden Valley Supply Co. v. Am. Ins., 537 N.W.2d 58 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Thus, Golden Valley filed suit on the bond issued by American for the full amount owed, contending that Golden Valley was the school district's supplier and that Tom-linson was liable to Golden Valley for all claims of labor and materials as a prime contractor of the project,…”
Holmen Concrete Prods. Co. v. Hardy Constr. Co., 2004 WI App 165 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “15 , and claims for damages stemming from the Village's failure to require Hardy to furnish a payment and performance bond as required by Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (lm). ¶ 6. The Village filed a motion for summary judgment contending that Holmen's and Iverson's claims against the…”
— Wis. Stat. § 779.14(lm)(b) — 3 cases
Golden Valley Supply Co. v. Am. Ins., 537 N.W.2d 58 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Thus, Golden Valley filed suit on the bond issued by American for the full amount owed, contending that Golden Valley was the school district's supplier and that Tom-linson was liable to Golden Valley for all claims of labor and materials as a prime contractor of the project,…”
Strong v. C.I.R., Inc., 507 N.W.2d 159 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contend that sec. 779.14, Stats. (1989-90), which allowed the employees of a subcontractor to maintain an action against the prime contractor and its surety, did not grant those employees the right to pursue the punitive double wage, fees and costs provisions…”
Holmen Concrete Prods. Co. v. Hardy Constr. Co., 2004 WI App 165 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “15 , and claims for damages stemming from the Village's failure to require Hardy to furnish a payment and performance bond as required by Wis. Stat. § 779.14 (lm). ¶ 6. The Village filed a motion for summary judgment contending that Holmen's and Iverson's claims against the…”
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.