Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (2026)
Venue in civil actions or special proceedings
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
801.50(2)(2) Except as otherwise provided by statute, venue in civil actions or special proceedings shall be as follows:
801.50(2)(b)(b) In the county where the real or tangible personal property, or some part thereof, which is the subject of the claim, is situated;
801.50(2)(d)(d) If the provisions under par. (a) to (c) do not apply, then venue shall be in any county designated by the plaintiff.
801.50(3)(a)(a) Except as provided in pars. (b) and (c), all actions in which the sole defendant is the state, any state board or commission, or any state officer, employee, or agent in an official capacity shall be venued in the county designated by the plaintiff unless another venue is specifically authorized by law.
801.50(3)(b)(b) All actions relating to the validity or invalidly of a rule or guidance document shall be venued as provided in s. 227.40 (1).
801.50(3)(c)(c) An action commenced by a prisoner, as defined under s. 801.02 (7) (a) 2., in which the sole defendant is the state, any state board or commission, or any state officer, employee, or agent in an official capacity shall be venued in Dane County unless another venue is specifically authorized by law.
801.50(3m)(3m) Venue in an action under s. 323.60 (8) or (9) related to hazardous substance releases shall be in the county as provided under s. 323.60 (10).
801.50(4)(a)(a) Where the plaintiff was convicted or sentenced if the action seeks relief from a judgment of conviction or sentence under which the plaintiff’s liberty is restrained.
801.50(4)(b)(b) Where the liberty of the plaintiff is restrained if the action seeks relief concerning any other matter relating to a restraint on the liberty of the plaintiff.
801.50(4m)(4m) Venue of an action to challenge the apportionment of any congressional or state legislative district shall be as provided in s. 751.035. Not more than 5 days after an action to challenge the apportionment of a congressional or state legislative district is filed, the clerk of courts for the county where the action is filed shall notify the clerk of the supreme court of the filing.
801.50(5)(5) Venue of an action for certiorari to review a probation, extended supervision, or parole revocation, a denial by a program review committee under s. 302.113 (9g) of a petition for modification of a bifurcated sentence, or a refusal of parole shall be the county in which the relator was last convicted of an offense for which the relator was on probation, extended supervision, or parole or for which the relator is currently incarcerated.
801.50(5c)(5c) Venue of an action for certiorari brought by the department of corrections under s. 302.113 (9) (d) or 302.114 (9) (d) to review a decision to not revoke extended supervision shall be in the county in which the person on extended supervision was convicted of the offense for which he or she is on extended supervision.
801.50(5m)(5m) Venue of an action arising from a consumer credit transaction, as defined in s. 421.301 (10), shall be in any county specified in s. 421.401 (1).
801.50(5p)(5p) Venue of an environmental pollution action brought by a person who is not a resident of this state against a commission created under s. 200.23 shall be in the county which contains the 1st class city that is located wholly or partially within the applicable district created under s. 200.23.
801.50(5r)(5r) Venue of an action under s. 813.12 growing out of domestic abuse shall be in the county in which the cause of action arose, where the petitioner or the respondent resides or where the petitioner is temporarily living, except that venue may be in any county within a 100-mile radius of the county seat of the county in which the petitioner resides or in any county in which the petitioner is temporarily living if the petitioner is any of the following:
801.50(5r)(f)(f) A person who is currently or has been in a dating relationship, as defined in s. 813.12 (1) (ag), with or a person who has a child in common with a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5r)(g)(g) An immediate family member, as defined in s. 97.605 (4) (a) 2., of a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5r)(h)(h) A household member, as defined in s. 813.12 (1) (c), of a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5s)(5s) Venue of an action under s. 813.122 or 813.125 shall be in the county in which the cause of action arose or where the petitioner or the respondent resides, except that venue may be in any county within a 100-mile radius of the county seat of the county in which the petitioner resides or in any county in which the petitioner is temporarily living if the petitioner is any of the following:
801.50(5s)(f)(f) A person who is currently or has been in a dating relationship, as defined in s. 813.12 (1) (ag), with or a person who has a child in common with a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5s)(g)(g) An immediate family member, as defined in s. 97.605 (4) (a) 2., of a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5s)(h)(h) A household member, as defined in s. 813.12 (1) (c), of a person listed in par. (a), (b), (c), or (d).
801.50(5t)(5t) Except as otherwise provided in ss. 801.52 and 971.223 (1) and (2), venue in a civil action to impose a forfeiture upon a resident of this state for a violation of chs. 5 to 12, subch. III of ch. 13, or subch. III of ch. 19, or for a violation of any other law arising from or in relation to the official functions of the subject of the investigation or any matter that involves elections, ethics, or lobbying regulation under chs. 5 to 12, subch. III of ch. 13, or subch. III of ch. 19, shall be in circuit court for the county where the defendant resides. For purposes of this subsection, a person other than a natural person resides within a county if the person’s principal place of operation is located within that county. This subsection does not affect which prosecutor has responsibility under s. 978.05 (2) to prosecute civil actions arising from violations under s. 971.223 (1).
801.50(5v)(b)(b) The county in which a court order requiring the respondent to submit a biological specimen to the state crime laboratories for deoxyribonucleic acid analysis was entered.
801.50(5v)(c)(c) The county in which any court proceeding was held that resulted in a requirement that the respondent submit a biological specimen to the state crime laboratories for deoxyribonucleic acid analysis.
801.50 HistoryHistory: 1983 a. 204, 228, 389, 538; 1985 a. 234, 291; 1987 a. 208; 1993 a. 318, 319; 1997 a. 283; 1999 a. 150 s. 672; 2001 a. 30 s. 108; 2001 a. 109; 2007 a. 1; 2009 a. 28, 42, 261; 2011 a. 21, 38, 39, 61; 2017 a. 302, 369.
801.50 NoteJudicial Council Note, 1983: Sub. (1) is designed to separate questions of venue from questions of jurisdiction and competency. A defect in venue is not jurisdictional and does not affect the competence of the court. The cure for a defect in venue is to change the place of trial.
801.50 NoteSub. (2) liberalizes the present venue statute by providing the plaintiff with a broader range of initial venue choices. This subsection also deletes many of the archaic distinctions in the former statute.
801.50 NoteThe following list contains many, but not all, of the specialized venue provisions not found in chapter 801: s. 48.185 (children’s code proceedings); s. 48.83 (adoption of minors); s. 51.45 (13) (n) (civil mental commitments); s. 52.10 (11) (proceedings under the uniform reciprocal enforcement of support act) [s. 52.10 (11) was renumbered s. 767.65 (11) and subsequently repealed by 1993 Wis. Act 326, which created ch. 769, the uniform interstate family support act]; s. 77.12 (forest croplands tax act); s. 111.60 (Wisconsin employment relations act); s. 144.73 (4) [now s. 291.95 (4)] (hazardous waste act); s. 185.44 (1) (cooperative contracts); s. 195.07 (railroad regulation act); s. 196.44 (3) (public utilities regulation act); s. 198.12 (2) (municipal power and water district act); s. 215.02 (5) (savings and loan association act); s. 227.16 (1) (administrative procedure act); s. 232.38 (solid waste recycling authority act); s. 234.22 (housing finance authority act); s. 345.31 (motor vehicle act); s. 421.401 (Wisconsin consumer act); s. 645.04 (1) (insurers rehabilitation and liquidation act); [s. 655.19 (health care liability and patients compensation)]; s. 701.14 (4) (living trusts); s. 752.21 (court of appeals); s. 753.065 (naturalization proceedings); s. 757.89 (Wisconsin judicial commission); s. 776.13 (annulment of corporate charters); s. 779.20 (log liens); s. 799.11 (small claims actions); s. 800.15 (municipal court appeals); s. 880.05 (guardianship actions); s. 882.03 (adult adoptions); s. 971.19 (criminal proceedings); s. 979.01 (inquests of the dead); s. 23.90 (conservation act); s. 45.50 (3) (soldiers and sailors civil relief); and s. 753.34 (5) (Menominee and Shawano counties).
801.50 NoteSub. (3) remains the same in substance.
801.50 NoteSubs. (4) and (5) remain unchanged.
801.50 NoteSub. (6) recognizes the authority of the judge to change venue under s. 801.52. [Bill 324-S]
801.50 AnnotationDiscussing “substantial business” under sub. (2) (c). Enpro Assessment Corp. v. Enpro Plus, Inc., 171 Wis. 2d 542, 492 N.W.2d 325 (Ct. App. 1992).
801.50 Annotation“Where the liberty of the plaintiff is restrained” under sub. (4) (b) is the county where the plaintiff is confined. State ex rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 173 Wis. 2d 222, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Ct. App. 1992).
801.50 AnnotationA certiorari proceeding to review a probation revocation must be heard in the circuit court of conviction, but it need not be heard by the same branch. Drow v. Schwarz, 225 Wis. 2d 362, 592 N.W.2d 623 (1999), 97-1867.
801.50 AnnotationThis section and s. 801.51, the general venue statutes, do not apply to actions arising from consumer credit transactions. Rather, the venue provision in s. 421.401 applies. Brunton v. Nuvell Credit Corp., 2010 WI 50, 325 Wis. 2d 135, 785 N.W.2d 302, 07-1253.
801.50 AnnotationBy requiring that a petitioner file its petition in the petitioner’s county of residence, s. 227.53 (1) (a) 3. does not conflict with or negate the petitioner’s ability to designate venue under sub. (3) (a). When a plaintiff designates the county for circuit court venue under sub. (3) (a), it means that the plaintiff is specifying venue, not choosing it. Even when s. 227.53 (1) (a) 3. eliminates any opportunity to choose a county, the plaintiff still designates venue within the meaning of sub. (3) (a). State ex rel. DNR v. Court of Appeals, 2018 WI 25, 380 Wis. 2d 354, 909 N.W.2d 114, 16-1980.
801.50 AnnotationAnother venue “is specifically authorized by law” under sub. (3) (a) only when venue is lawfully transferred to a county different from the one designated by the plaintiff. After 2011 Wis. Act 61, the “unless” clause in sub. (3) (a) serves only as a mechanism by which to oust the plaintiff’s venue designation. State ex rel. DNR v. Court of Appeals, 2018 WI 25, 380 Wis. 2d 354, 909 N.W.2d 114, 16-1980.
801.50 AnnotationA plaintiff must first comply with the requirements for venue in sub. (2). If venue is proper, only then may a circuit court exercise its discretion under s. 801.52 to change venue to another county. In this case, because venue was not proper in Milwaukee County, the circuit court erred when it applied s. 801.52 to keep the case in Milwaukee County. Salachna v. Edgebrook Radiology, 2021 WI App 76, 399 Wis. 2d 759, 966 N.W.2d 923, 20-1062.
801.50 AnnotationIn this case, the lawsuit clearly related to the validity or invalidity of a rule or guidance document within the meaning of sub. (3) (b). It was likewise clear that the lawsuit remained within the confines of sub. (3) (b) even though the plaintiff sought injunctive relief in addition to declaratory relief. Because the claim for injunctive relief was completely dependent upon a favorable decision on the claim for declaratory relief, the action was quintessentially one for declaratory relief. Thus, venue was not also proper under sub. (3) (a) and did not trigger the appellate venue-shifting provision of s. 752.21 (2). State ex rel. Kormanik v. Brash, 2022 WI 67, 404 Wis. 2d 568, 980 N.W.2d 948, 22-1736.
801.50 AnnotationIn an action against multiple defendants, if venue is proper as to any one defendant, then the action is properly venued, and any other defendant is not entitled to a change in venue as a matter of right. Stelling v. Middlesex Insurance Co., 2023 WI App 10, 406 Wis. 2d 197, 986 N.W.2d 354, 22-0536.
801.50 AnnotationThe phrase “does substantial business” in sub. (2) (c) means that the extent of the defendant’s various commercial activities and business relationships, of any type, conducted or occurring at least in part in the county at issue, considered in isolation or relative to the defendant’s total commercial activity and business relationships, is considerable. The phrase “the county” in sub. (2) (c) does not denote exclusively one county. A defendant may do business that is substantial in a large number of counties. Stelling v. Middlesex Insurance Co., 2023 WI App 10, 406 Wis. 2d 197, 986 N.W.2d 354, 22-0536.
801.50 AnnotationWisconsin’s revised venue statutes. Fullin. WBB Sept. 1984.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44
cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018).
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018). “The second subsection contains a specific rule, which applies only to the subset of cases in which the plaintiff designated venue in the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3)(a). However, both the general and specific rules speak in mandatory terms.”
Brunton v. Nuvell Credit Corp., 2010 WI 50 (Wis. 2010). “50 "or any other statute designating proper venue." Brunton contends that this language incorporates § 421.”
Kett v. Cmty. Credit Plan, Inc., 596 N.W.2d 786 (Wis. 1999). “206 (1)(b) on the general venue statute, Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (1), which provides that "[a] defect in venue shall not affect the validity of any order or judgment.”
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
Kohlbeck v. Reliance Const. Co., Inc., 2002 WI App 142 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “We first note that, even if we agreed with the circuit court that the Kohlbecks' had failed to state a claim under Wis.”
Voit v. Madison Newspapers, Inc., 341 N.W.2d 693 (Wis. 1984). “50(6) creates a classification between corporate and individual publishers that implicates first amendment rights because it may prompt a corporate publisher either to refrain from printing certain stories or to curb circulation to counties where it may not want to defend…”
State Ex Rel. L'Minggio v. Gamble, 2003 WI 82 (Wis. 2003). “Curry, Judge, construed L'Minggio's action as a petition for certiorari, rather than habeas corpus, and transferred the case to Dane County in accordance with the venue provision of Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3). [4] The Dane County Circuit Court, Gerald C.”
State Ex Rel. West v. Bartow, 2002 WI App 42 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “West argues that the trial court erred in transferring venue because his habeas corpus petition was properly venued in Winnebago county pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (4)(b) (1999-2000). 1 While we agree that this matter was properly venued in Winnebago county, we conclude that…”
Enpro Assessment Corp. v. Enpro Plus, Inc., 492 N.W.2d 325 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “The term "substantial business" as it appears in sec. 801.50, Stats., has never been interpreted by a Wisconsin appellate court.”
Drow v. Schwarz, 592 N.W.2d 623 (Wis. 1999). “See Wis. Stat. §801.50 (5) (1997-98). 2 Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals.”
Hoffman v. Mem'l Hosp. of Iowa Cnty., 538 N.W.2d 627 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “In most cases, § 801.50, Stats., determines the venue of a lawsuit.”
State Ex Rel. Hansen v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., 513 N.W.2d 139 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “, provides that any party may challenge venue on the grounds of noncompliance with § 801.50, Stats., by filing a motion for change of venue.”
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(1) — 5 cases
Kett v. Cmty. Credit Plan, Inc., 596 N.W.2d 786 (Wis. 1999). “206 (1)(b) on the general venue statute, Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (1), which provides that "[a] defect in venue shall not affect the validity of any order or judgment.”
Kett v. Cmty. Credit Plan, Inc., 586 N.W.2d 68 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998).
Mueller v. Brunn, 304 N.W.2d 144 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981).
Johnson v. Berge, 2003 WI App 51 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003).
Brunton v. Nuvell Credit Corp., 2009 WI App 3 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(12) — 1 case
Voit v. Madison Newspapers, Inc., 341 N.W.2d 693 (Wis. 1984). “50(6) creates a classification between corporate and individual publishers that implicates first amendment rights because it may prompt a corporate publisher either to refrain from printing certain stories or to curb circulation to counties where it may not want to defend…”
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2) — 7 cases
Brunton v. Nuvell Credit Corp., 2010 WI 50 (Wis. 2010). “50 "or any other statute designating proper venue." Brunton contends that this language incorporates § 421.”
Enpro Assessment Corp. v. Enpro Plus, Inc., 492 N.W.2d 325 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “The term "substantial business" as it appears in sec. 801.50, Stats., has never been interpreted by a Wisconsin appellate court.”
Hoffman v. Mem'l Hosp. of Iowa Cnty., 538 N.W.2d 627 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “In most cases, § 801.50, Stats., determines the venue of a lawsuit.”
State v. Nelson, 285 N.W.2d 924 (Wis. Ct. App. 1979).
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2)(a) — 4 cases
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018). “The second subsection contains a specific rule, which applies only to the subset of cases in which the plaintiff designated venue in the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3)(a). However, both the general and specific rules speak in mandatory terms.”
Klein v. Wisconsin Resource Ctr., 582 N.W.2d 44 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998).
Jacek Salachna v. Marten Transp., LTD., 2021 WI App 76 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2)(b) — 1 case
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2)(c) — 4 cases
Enpro Assessment Corp. v. Enpro Plus, Inc., 492 N.W.2d 325 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “The term "substantial business" as it appears in sec. 801.50, Stats., has never been interpreted by a Wisconsin appellate court.”
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
In Re Marriage of Sharp v. Sharp, 518 N.W.2d 254 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994).
Jacek Salachna v. Marten Transp., LTD., 2021 WI App 76 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2)(d) — 2 cases
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018). “The second subsection contains a specific rule, which applies only to the subset of cases in which the plaintiff designated venue in the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3)(a). However, both the general and specific rules speak in mandatory terms.”
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(2)(e) — 1 case
Milwaukee Concrete Studios, Ltd. v. Fjeld Mfg. Co., Inc., & Janice Krueger, 8 F.3d 441 (7th Cir. 1993).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(3) — 7 cases
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018). “The second subsection contains a specific rule, which applies only to the subset of cases in which the plaintiff designated venue in the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3)(a). However, both the general and specific rules speak in mandatory terms.”
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
State Ex Rel. L'Minggio v. Gamble, 2003 WI 82 (Wis. 2003). “Curry, Judge, construed L'Minggio's action as a petition for certiorari, rather than habeas corpus, and transferred the case to Dane County in accordance with the venue provision of Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3). [4] The Dane County Circuit Court, Gerald C.”
Klein v. Wisconsin Resource Ctr., 582 N.W.2d 44 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998).
Town of Eagle v. Christensen, 529 N.W.2d 245 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(3)(a) — 6 cases
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Dist. IV, 909 N.W.2d 114 (Wis. 2018). “The second subsection contains a specific rule, which applies only to the subset of cases in which the plaintiff designated venue in the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (3)(a). However, both the general and specific rules speak in mandatory terms.”
Wisconsin Mfrs. & Com. v. Tony Evers, 2021 WI App 35 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash, 2022 WI 67 (Wis. 2022).
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash, 2022 WI 67 (Wis. 2022).
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash (Wis. 2022).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(3)(b) — 3 cases
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash, 2022 WI 67 (Wis. 2022).
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash, 2022 WI 67 (Wis. 2022).
Nancy Kormanik v. William Brash (Wis. 2022).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(4) — 3 cases
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
State Ex Rel. West v. Bartow, 2002 WI App 42 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “West argues that the trial court erred in transferring venue because his habeas corpus petition was properly venued in Winnebago county pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (4)(b) (1999-2000). 1 While we agree that this matter was properly venued in Winnebago county, we conclude that…”
Jacek Salachna v. Marten Transp., LTD., 2021 WI App 76 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(4)(a) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. West v. Bartow, 2002 WI App 42 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “West argues that the trial court erred in transferring venue because his habeas corpus petition was properly venued in Winnebago county pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (4)(b) (1999-2000). 1 While we agree that this matter was properly venued in Winnebago county, we conclude that…”
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(4)(b) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
Off. of Lawyer Reg. v. Carson, 2015 WI 26 (Wis. 2015).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(4m) — 2 cases
Elizabeth Bothfeld v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n, 2025 WI 53 (Wis. 2025).
Wisconsin Bus. Leaders for Democracy v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n, 2025 WI 52 (Wis. 2025).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(5) — 5 cases
Bartus v. Wisconsin Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., 501 N.W.2d 419 (Wis. 1993).
State Ex Rel. Hansen v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., 513 N.W.2d 139 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “, provides that any party may challenge venue on the grounds of noncompliance with § 801.50, Stats., by filing a motion for change of venue.”
State Ex Rel. MacEmon v. Christie, 576 N.W.2d 84 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998).
Drow v. Schwarz, 592 N.W.2d 623 (Wis. 1999). “See Wis. Stat. §801.50 (5) (1997-98). 2 Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals.”
David Aumann v. State of Wisconsin DOC (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(5)(m) — 1 case
Kett v. Cmty. Credit Plan, Inc., 596 N.W.2d 786 (Wis. 1999). “206 (1)(b) on the general venue statute, Wis. Stat. § 801.50 (1), which provides that "[a] defect in venue shall not affect the validity of any order or judgment.”
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(5m) — 1 case
Brunton v. Nuvell Credit Corp., 2010 WI 50 (Wis. 2010). “50 "or any other statute designating proper venue." Brunton contends that this language incorporates § 421.”
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(6) — 3 cases
Voit v. Madison Newspapers, Inc., 341 N.W.2d 693 (Wis. 1984). “50(6) creates a classification between corporate and individual publishers that implicates first amendment rights because it may prompt a corporate publisher either to refrain from printing certain stories or to curb circulation to counties where it may not want to defend…”
Jacek Salachna v. Marten Transp., LTD., 2021 WI App 76 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
George T. Stelling v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 2023 WI App 10 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(8) — 1 case
Aparacor, Inc. v. Dep't of Indus., Labor & Human Relations, 293 N.W.2d 545 (Wis. 1980).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(9) — 1 case
Miller v. Smith, 302 N.W.2d 468 (Wis. 1981).
— Wis. Stat. § 801.50(9r) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 496 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “(3) or (4) of sec. 801.50, Stats., 1 and (2) whether Freder *225 ick's liberty is restrained in Dane or Columbia county under sec.”
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.