Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 88.09 (2026)
Certiorari; drainage board decisions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
88.0988.09 Certiorari; drainage board decisions. Any person subject to an order or rule of the drainage board may, within 30 days after publication of the order or rule, commence an action seeking the remedy available by certiorari. The court may not stay proceedings involving the order or rule when an action is commenced, but may, on application, on notice to the board and for cause, grant a restraining order. The board is not required to return the original papers acted upon by it, but may return certified or sworn copies of the papers. If necessary for the proper disposition of the matter, the court may take evidence, or appoint a referee to take evidence and report findings of fact and conclusions of law as the court directs, which shall constitute a part of the proceedings upon which the determination of the court shall be made. The court may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify, the order or rule brought up for review.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Thomas D. Nowell v. City of Wausau, 2013 WI 88 (Wis. 2013).
Thomas D. Nowell v. City of Wausau, 2013 WI 88 (Wis. 2013). “, Wis. Stat. § 88.09 ; Wis. Stat. § 62.23 (7)(e)(10); Wis.”
State Ex Rel. Town of Norway Sanitary Dist. 1 v. Racine Cnty. Drainage Bd. of Commissioners, 583 N.W.2d 437 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). “Act 456, § 21, states that pursuant to § 88.09, Stats., the court reviews the board's actions to determine if it acted unreasonably or made a decision unsupported by substantial evidence.”
Donald Isherwood v. Portage Cnty. Drainage Dist. (Wis. Ct. App. 2019). “§ 88.09 differs from some other forms of certiorari review, notably including the ability of the circuit court to take evidence if necessary to supplement the certiorari record: Any person subject to an order or rule of the drainage board may, within 30 days after publication of…”
Eagle Lake Manor Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Racine Cnty. Bd. of Drainage Commissioners (Wis. Ct. App. 2021). “The court determined the petition was sufficient, the Board acted reasonably, there was sufficient evidence to support the annexation, and the record did not indicate any attempt to “gerrymander” the drainage district.”
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.