Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 823.15 (2026)

Undertaking to release building or structure

✓ current as of July 2026

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

823.15823.15 Undertaking to release building or structure. The owner of any building or structure, or the owner of the land upon which the building or structure is located, affected by an action under s. 823.10 or 823.113 may appear at any time after the commencement of the action and file an undertaking in a sum and with the sureties required by the court to the effect that he or she will immediately abate the alleged nuisance, if it exists, and prevent the same from being reestablished in the building or structure, and will pay all costs that may be awarded against him or her in the action. Upon receipt of the undertaking, the court may dismiss the action as to the building or structure and revoke any order previously made closing the building or structure; but that dismissal and revocation shall not release the property from any judgment, lien, penalty, or liability that the property is subject to by law. The court has discretion in accepting any undertaking, the sum, supervision, satisfaction, and all other conditions of the undertaking, but the period that the undertaking shall run may not be less than one year.

823.15 HistoryHistory: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 762, 782 (1975); Stats. 1975 s. 823.15; 1989 a. 122.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1997–1999 · leading case: City of Milwaukee v. Arrieh, 565 N.W.2d 291 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Milwaukee v. Arrieh, 565 N.W.2d 291 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 5× “The trial court did not, however, order the property sold, *770 but, rather, gave Arrieh an opportunity to post an undertaking under § 823.15, Stats. Arrieh offered an undertaking of $2,000, which the trial court rejected.”

State v. Schultz, 591 N.W.2d 904 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “Schultz sought an order granting an evidentiary hearing at which he would be permitted to present evidence as to his lack of knowledge of the underlying nuisance conditions as a *502 defense to the State's nuisance claim.”

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.