Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2026)
Consolidation; separate trials
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
805.05(1)(a)(a) When actions which might have been brought as a single action under s. 803.04 are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all of the claims in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated; and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.
805.05(1)(b)(b) When actions which might have been brought as a single action under s. 803.04 are pending before different courts, any such action may be transferred upon motion of any party or of the court to another court where the related action is pending. A conference involving both judges and all counsel may be convened on the record as prescribed by s. 807.13 (3). Transfer under this paragraph shall be made only by the joint written order of the transferring court and the court to which the action is transferred.
805.05(2)(2) Separate trials. The court, in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to expedition or economy, or pursuant to s. 803.04 (2) (b), may order a separate trial of any claim, cross claim, counterclaim, or 3rd-party claim, or of any number of claims, always preserving inviolate the right of trial in the mode to which the parties are entitled.
805.05 HistoryHistory: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 692 (1975); Sup. Ct. Order, 141 Wis. 2d xiii (1987); 2005 a. 253; 2007 a. 97.
805.05 NoteJudicial Council Note, 1988: Sub. (1) (b) is amended by allowing conferences regarding consolidation of actions to be conducted by telephone conference. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1988]
805.05 AnnotationThe trial court’s order to bifurcate the issues of liability and damages and to try the separate issues before separate juries contravened sub. (2) and could not be reconciled with the requirement of s. 805.09 (2) that the same five-sixths of the jury must agree on all questions necessary to sustain a verdict. Waters v. Pertzborn, 2001 WI 62, 243 Wis. 2d 703, 627 N.W.2d 497, 99-1702.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Waters Ex Rel. Skow v. Pertzborn, 2001 WI 62 (Wis. 2001).
Waters Ex Rel. Skow v. Pertzborn, 2001 WI 62 (Wis. 2001). “07 (Rule 42), Judicial Council Civil Rules Revision Committee, February 1973 with Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2). The records of the Judicial Council Committee are on file with the Wisconsin State Law Library.”
Kontowicz v. Am. Stand. Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 2006 WI 48 (Wis. 2006). “46 may be bifurcated under Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2), and that in the case of Buyatt, the award of interest should be in accord with Wis.”
Brethorst v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins., 2011 WI 41 (Wis. 2011). “Pertzborn that only claims, not issues, may be bifurcated under Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2). Waters v. Pertzborn 2001 WI 62, ¶¶ 18-24 , 243 Wis.”
Est. of Rille Ex Rel. Rille v. Physicians Ins. Co., 2007 WI 36 (Wis. 2007). “This would make the subsequent cross-claim similar to a contribution claim that would be litigated in a subsequent action.”
Dahmen v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins., 2001 WI App 198 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “We do note, however, that the legislative history of this statute reveals that the rule barring bifurcation of issues does not apply to issues regarding insurance coverage.”
Wisconsin Dep't of Workforce Dev. v. Wisconsin Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2016 WI App 21 (Wis. Ct. App. 2016). “Finally, it argues that consolidation was permissible under Wis. Stat. § 805.05 despite the lack of competency.”
Fire Ins. Exch. v. Basten, 549 N.W.2d 690 (Wis. 1996). “In the event that the joining of multiple parties to the action will result in duplicate proceedings, the circuit court judge, in the exercise of his or her discretion, should order that the actions be consolidated in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 805.05 . Because all interested…”
ZAWISTOWAKI v. Kissinger, 466 N.W.2d 664 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “In Zawistowski's view, sec. 805.05(2), Stats., empowers the court to order separate trials of claims, but not of individual issues underlying these claims.”
Dilger v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins., 2015 WI App 54 (Wis. Ct. App. 2015). “46 may be bifurcated per Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2) when conducive to expedition and economy, for convenience, or to avoid prejudice.”
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 805.05(l)(a) and therefore addressed § 805.”
Edward G. Staats v. Cnty. of Sawyer & Cnty. of Bayfield, 220 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2000). “See Wis. Stat. § 805.05 . That theory, however, is inconsistent with the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hanlon v.”
United Pac. Ins. v. Metro. Sewerage Comm'n, 338 N.W.2d 298 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “2 Section 805.05(1) and (2) authorizes the consolidation of cases for trial, whether or not they are pending in separate courts or branches of the same court and, if necessary, the ordering of separate trials of discrete claims.”
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(1) — 4 cases
United Pac. Ins. v. Metro. Sewerage Comm'n, 338 N.W.2d 298 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “2 Section 805.05(1) and (2) authorizes the consolidation of cases for trial, whether or not they are pending in separate courts or branches of the same court and, if necessary, the ordering of separate trials of discrete claims.”
Ixonia State Bank v. Schuelke, 491 N.W.2d 772 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992).
LTD Acquisitions LLC v. Joe E. Meier (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
Kenneth C. Grissman v. Est. of John H. Boettcher (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(1)(a) — 2 cases
In Interest of TMS, 448 N.W.2d 282 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
Bourne v. Melli Law, S.C., 923 N.W.2d 177 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(1)(b) — 1 case
Enbridge Energy Co. v. Dane Cnty., 917 N.W.2d 232 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(2) — 8 cases
Waters Ex Rel. Skow v. Pertzborn, 2001 WI 62 (Wis. 2001). “07 (Rule 42), Judicial Council Civil Rules Revision Committee, February 1973 with Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2). The records of the Judicial Council Committee are on file with the Wisconsin State Law Library.”
ZAWISTOWAKI v. Kissinger, 466 N.W.2d 664 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “In Zawistowski's view, sec. 805.05(2), Stats., empowers the court to order separate trials of claims, but not of individual issues underlying these claims.”
Dahmen v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins., 2001 WI App 198 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “We do note, however, that the legislative history of this statute reveals that the rule barring bifurcation of issues does not apply to issues regarding insurance coverage.”
Muchow v. Goding, 544 N.W.2d 218 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995).
State v. J.A. (In re Termination Parental Rights to H.V.A.), 925 N.W.2d 790 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(2)(b) — 1 case
Waters Ex Rel. Skow v. Pertzborn, 2001 WI 62 (Wis. 2001). “07 (Rule 42), Judicial Council Civil Rules Revision Committee, February 1973 with Wis. Stat. § 805.05 (2). The records of the Judicial Council Committee are on file with the Wisconsin State Law Library.”
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(8) — 1 case
James Swiderski v. Swiderski Equip., Inc. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(l)(a) — 3 cases
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 805.05(l)(a) and therefore addressed § 805.”
Wisconsin Dep't of Workforce Dev. v. Wisconsin Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2016 WI App 21 (Wis. Ct. App. 2016). “Finally, it argues that consolidation was permissible under Wis. Stat. § 805.05 despite the lack of competency.”
S.D.S. v. Rock Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 448 N.W.2d 282 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
— Wis. Stat. § 805.05(l)(d) — 1 case
In Re Marriage of Bushelman v. Bushelman, 2001 WI App 124 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 805.05(l)(a) and therefore addressed § 805.”
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.