Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 893.02 (2026)
Action, when commenced
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
893.02893.02 Action, when commenced. Except as provided in s. 893.415 (3), an action is commenced, within the meaning of any provision of law which limits the time for the commencement of an action, as to each defendant, when the summons naming the defendant and the complaint are filed with the court, but no action shall be deemed commenced as to any defendant upon whom service of authenticated copies of the summons and complaint has not been made within 90 days after filing.
893.02 HistoryHistory: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 770 (1975); 1975 c. 218; 1979 c. 323; 1997 a. 187; 2003 a. 287.
893.02 NoteJudicial Council Committee’s Note, 1979: This section is previous s. 893.39 of the statutes renumbered for more logical placement in restructured ch. 893. [Bill 326-A]
893.02 AnnotationIn a products liability action, a new cause of action for punitive damages brought after the statute of limitations expired related back to the date of filing the original pleading. Wussow v. Commercial Mechanisms, Inc., 97 Wis. 2d 136, 293 N.W.2d 897 (1980).
893.02 AnnotationAn action against an unnamed defendant under s. 807.12 that was filed on the last day of a limitation period, in which amended process naming the defendant was served within 60 days after filing, was not time barred. The relation back requirements of s. 802.09 (3) were inapplicable. Lak v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc., 100 Wis. 2d 641, 302 N.W.2d 483 (1981).
893.02 AnnotationService of process did not commence an action when the plaintiff failed to file the summons and complaint. The defendant’s answer did not waive the statute of limitations defense or estop the defendant from raising it after the limitation period expired. Hester v. Williams, 117 Wis. 2d 634, 345 N.W.2d 426 (1984).
893.02 AnnotationA fictitiously designated defendant’s right to extinction of an action does not effectively vest until 60 days after the statute of limitations runs. Lavine v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 140 Wis. 2d 434, 410 N.W.2d 623 (Ct. App. 1987).
893.02 AnnotationTimely Service Abroad in Diversity Suits. La Fave. Wis. Law. Nov. 2000.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Patricia A. Johnson v. Michael R. Masters, 2013 WI 43 (Wis. 2013).
Patricia A. Johnson v. Michael R. Masters, 2013 WI 43 (Wis. 2013). “¶76 The argument is grounded in the text of Wis. Stat. § 893.02 : Except as provided in s.”
Richards v. Young, 441 N.W.2d 742 (Wis. 1989). “The issue in this case is whether the circuit court lacked competency to proceed because the plaintiff failed to serve the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) with a copy of the complaint within sixty days after filing the action as required by sec.…”
Landis v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc., 2001 WI 86 (Wis. 2001). “Wis. Stat. § 893.02 . [4] Under Wis. Stat.”
Paul v. Skemp, 2001 WI 42 (Wis. 2001). “Wis. Stat. § 893.02 . ¶ 16. Although "[t]his court has the power to establish when claims accrue," the legislature has established when medical malpractice claims accrue in Wis.”
Colby v. Columbia Cnty., 550 N.W.2d 124 (Wis. 1996). “80 (1)(b) provides that no action may be brought or maintained against a governmental subdivision unless the claim has been rejected or 120 days have passed since the notice was filed, Colby did not commence his action when he served a summons and complaint under Wis. Stat. §…”
Matthies v. Positive Saf. Mfg. Co., 2001 WI 82 (Wis. 2001). “2d at 200 ; Wis. Stat. § 893.02 . For § 895.045(1) to apply to an action filed on the date it becomes effective, events leading to the accrual of the action must have occurred previously.”
Korkow v. Gen. Cas. Co. of Wisconsin, 344 N.W.2d 108 (Wis. 1984). “Section 893.02. A complaint under the current civil procedure rule is “a short and plain statement of the claim, identifying the transaction, occurrence or event .”
Granado v. Sentry Ins., 599 N.W.2d 62 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “It states, in pertinent part: "An action is commenced, within the meaning of any provision of law which limits the time for the commencement of an action, as to each defendant, when the summons naming the defendant and the complaint are filed with the court Section 801.”
Outagamie Cnty. v. Town of Greenville, 2000 WI App 65 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “The Town cites Wis. Stat. § 893.02 , which provides: An action is commenced, within the meaning of any provision of law which limits the time for the commencement of an action, as to each defendant, when the summons naming the defendant and the complaint are filed with the…”
State v. Town of Linn, 556 N.W.2d 394 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “01(13) is placed in issue by the parties, the joint committee for review of administrative rules shall be served with a copy of the petition and, with the approval of the joint committee on legislative organization, shall be made a party and be entitled to be heard.”
Fox v. Smith, 464 N.W.2d 845 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990). “Our statement, although superficially supporting the City's position here, is thus not precedent. See Webster v. Fall, 266 U.S. 507, 511 (1925) ("Questions which merely lurk in the record, neither brought to the attention of the court nor ruled upon, are not to be considered as…”
Gray v. Lacke, 885 F.2d 399 (7th Cir. 1989). “See Wis.Stat. Ann. § 893.02 (West 1983). 6 In this case, they note that although Gray filed her complaint on April 18, 1988, she did not serve them with the complaint until August 12, 1988.”
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.