Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 801.04 (2026)

Jurisdictional requirements for judgments against persons, status and things

✓ current as of July 2026

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

801.04801.04 Jurisdictional requirements for judgments against persons, status and things.

801.04(1)(1) Jurisdiction of subject matter required for all civil actions. A court of this state may entertain a civil action only when the court has power to hear the kind of action brought. The power of the court to hear the kind of action brought is called “jurisdiction of the subject matter”. Jurisdiction of the subject matter is conferred by the constitution and statutes of this state and by statutes of the United States; it cannot be conferred by consent of the parties. Except as provided in s. 813.015, nothing in chs. 801 to 847 affects the subject matter jurisdiction of any court of this state.

801.04(2)(2) Personal jurisdiction. A court of this state having jurisdiction of the subject matter may render a judgment against a party personally only if there exists one or more of the jurisdictional grounds set forth in s. 801.05 or 801.06 and in addition either:

801.04(2)(a)(a) A summons is served upon the person pursuant to s. 801.11; or

801.04(2)(b)(b) Service of a summons is dispensed with under the conditions in s. 801.06.

801.04(3)(3) Jurisdiction in rem or quasi in rem. A court of this state having jurisdiction of the subject matter may render a judgment in rem or quasi in rem upon a status or upon a property or other thing pursuant to s. 801.07 and the judgment in such action may affect the interests in the status, property or thing of all persons served pursuant to s. 801.12 with a summons and complaint or notice of object of action as the case requires.

801.04 HistoryHistory: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 591 (1975); 1979 c. 89; 2015 a. 4.

801.04 AnnotationA court having jurisdiction may decline to exercise it if there are sufficient policy reasons to do so. Jones v. Jones, 54 Wis. 2d 41, 194 N.W.2d 627 (1972).

801.04 AnnotationState courts, including small claims courts, have a constitutional obligation to hear and decide 42 USC 1983 cases whether or not the federal right asserted is pendent to a state claim. Terry v. Kolski, 78 Wis. 2d 475, 254 N.W.2d 704 (1977).

801.04 AnnotationA prior adult proceeding that litigated the question of the respondent’s age collaterally estopped the state from relitigating the same question in juvenile court. The juvenile court had subject matter jurisdiction of the case. H.N.T. v. State, 125 Wis. 2d 242, 371 N.W.2d 395 (Ct. App. 1985).

801.04 AnnotationSubject to limited exceptions, complainants in 42 USC 1983 actions need not exhaust administrative remedies prior to being brought in state court. Casteel v. Vaade, 167 Wis. 2d 1, 481 N.W.2d 476 (1992).

801.04 AnnotationConstitutional Law—Due Process—Civil Procedure—State Court Jurisdiction. Geilfuss. 1978 WLR 533.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 47 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Schaefer v. Riegelman, 2002 WI 18 (Wis. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Schaefer v. Riegelman, 2002 WI 18 (Wis. 2002). · cites it 6× “Here, we must decide whether there was a defect in Schaefer's pleadings that would deprive the court of jurisdiction and entitle Riegelman to judgment as a matter of law. The plaintiff must secure the court's personal jurisdiction over the defendant by properly serving the…”

Eberhardy v. Circuit Court for Wood Cnty., 307 N.W.2d 881 (Wis. 1981). · cites it 4× “, recites that a court may entertain a civil action only when it has the power to hear the kind of action brought, it refers to this power as "jurisdiction of the subject matter" and further recites: "Jurisdiction of the subject matter is conferred by the constitution and…”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31 (Wis. 2002). · cites it 2× “06, as required by § 801.04(2), are present. The accident did not occur in Wisconsin, but rather in Manitoba, nor does the record reflect that Unrau has ever been to Wisconsin, or even had any contacts with Wisconsin.”

Kohler Co. v. Wixen, 555 N.W.2d 640 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “See § 801.04(1), STATS. Competency is a narrower concept than subject matter jurisdiction and is grounded in the court's power to exercise its subject matter jurisdiction.”

Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Matthew S., 2005 WI 84 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 4× “VII, § 8; Wis. Stat. § 801.04 . "Such a legislative enactment affects that court's competency to proceed rather than its subject matter jurisdiction.”

Wisconsin's Env't Decade, Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 267 N.W.2d 609 (Wis. 1978). · cites it 2× “These arguments are founded on the view that failure to serve nonagency parties is a defect of personal jurisdiction rather than subject matter jurisdiction. Under the dispositive holding of the Cudahy Case, supra , however, it is clear that such a failure prevents the circuit…”

City of Milwaukee v. Glass, 2001 WI 61 (Wis. 2001). · cites it 5× “(Rule) § 801.04(2) provides that a court: may render a judgment against a party personally only if there exists one or more of the jurisdictional grounds set forth in s.”

Richards v. Young, 441 N.W.2d 742 (Wis. 1989). · cites it 4× “Section 801.04 provides that "[t]he power of the court to hear the kind of action brought is called `jurisdiction of the subject matter'.”

Tensfeldt v. Haberman, 2009 WI 77 (Wis. 2009). · cites it 2× “Sec. 801.04, Stats.; Gelatt v. DeDakis, 77 Wis.”

Ocasio v. Froedtert Mem'l Lutheran Hosp., 2001 WI App 264 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “'" Wis. Stat. § 801.04 (1). ¶ 28. "[I]t has long been the rule that parties may waive or consent to a court's lack of personal jurisdiction, but not to its lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

In Matter of Est. of Bilsie, 302 N.W.2d 508 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). “” Sec. 801.04(1), Stats. 6 The quantum of proof necessary to create “any reasonable basis” will vary with the burden of proof imposed by law.”

In Re Incorporation of Town of Fitchburg, 299 N.W.2d 199 (Wis. 1980). · cites it 2× “" Sec. 801.04(2), Stats., provides: "(2) PERSONAL JURISDICTION.”

Show all 47 citing cases →

— Wis. Stat. § 801.04(1) — 17 cases

Eberhardy v. Circuit Court for Wood Cnty., 307 N.W.2d 881 (Wis. 1981). “, recites that a court may entertain a civil action only when it has the power to hear the kind of action brought, it refers to this power as "jurisdiction of the subject matter" and further recites: "Jurisdiction of the subject matter is conferred by the constitution and…”

Schaefer v. Riegelman, 2002 WI 18 (Wis. 2002). “Here, we must decide whether there was a defect in Schaefer's pleadings that would deprive the court of jurisdiction and entitle Riegelman to judgment as a matter of law. The plaintiff must secure the court's personal jurisdiction over the defendant by properly serving the…”

Isermann v. MBL Life Assurance Corp., 605 N.W.2d 210 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999).

In the Matter of Guardianship of Eberhardy, 294 N.W.2d 540 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980).

— Wis. Stat. § 801.04(2) — 11 cases

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Gillette, 2002 WI 31 (Wis. 2002). “06, as required by § 801.04(2), are present. The accident did not occur in Wisconsin, but rather in Manitoba, nor does the record reflect that Unrau has ever been to Wisconsin, or even had any contacts with Wisconsin.”

Kohler Co. v. Wixen, 555 N.W.2d 640 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “See § 801.04(1), STATS. Competency is a narrower concept than subject matter jurisdiction and is grounded in the court's power to exercise its subject matter jurisdiction.”

City of Milwaukee v. Glass, 2001 WI 61 (Wis. 2001). “(Rule) § 801.04(2) provides that a court: may render a judgment against a party personally only if there exists one or more of the jurisdictional grounds set forth in s.”

In Re Incorporation of Town of Fitchburg, 299 N.W.2d 199 (Wis. 1980). “" Sec. 801.04(2), Stats., provides: "(2) PERSONAL JURISDICTION.”

Miller v. Smith, 302 N.W.2d 468 (Wis. 1981).

— Wis. Stat. § 801.04(2)(a) — 1 case

Bell v. Employers Mut. Cas. Co., 541 N.W.2d 824 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995).

— Wis. Stat. § 801.04(3) — 2 cases

Est. of Boyle v. Wickhem, Buell, Meier, Wickem & Southworth, S.C., 397 N.W.2d 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986).

— Wis. Stat. § 801.04(7)(a) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Schatz v. McCaughtry, 2003 WI 80 (Wis. 2003).

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.