Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 893.04 (2026)
Computation of period within which action may be commenced
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
893.04893.04 Computation of period within which action may be commenced. Unless otherwise specifically prescribed by law, a period of limitation within which an action may be commenced is computed from the time that the cause of action accrues until the action is commenced.
893.04 NoteJudicial Council Committee’s Note, 1979: Previous section 893.48 is repealed and sections 893.04 and 893.14 created for the purpose of clarity. See Denzer v. Rouse, 48 Wis. 2d 528, 180 N.W.2d 521 (1970) for a discussion of when a cause of action accrues, citing Holifield v. Setco Industries, Inc. 42 Wis. 2d 750, 168 N.W.2d 177 (1969). [Bill 326-A]
893.04 AnnotationIn attorney malpractice actions, as in medical malpractice cases, when the date of the negligence and the date of injury are the same, the statute of limitations runs from that date, for that is the time when the cause of action accrues. Denzer v. Rouse, 48 Wis. 2d 528, 180 N.W.2d 521 (1970).
893.04 AnnotationThe loss of the right to a patent is the loss of the right to exclude others, and, therefore, the injury occurred on the date that the right to the patent was lost. Boehm v. Wheeler, 65 Wis. 2d 668, 223 N.W.2d 536 (1974).
893.04 AnnotationBecause s. 67.11 requires moneys in a sinking fund to remain inviolate until the bonds are retired, a cause of action regarding the fund could only accrue at retirement. Joint School District No. 1 v. City of Chilton, 78 Wis. 2d 52, 253 N.W.2d 879 (1977).
893.04 AnnotationA tort claim accrues when the injury is discovered or reasonably should have been discovered. This “discovery rule” applies to all tort actions other than those governed by a statutory discovery rule. Hansen v. A.H. Robins Co., 113 Wis. 2d 550, 335 N.W.2d 578 (1983).
893.04 AnnotationWhen the plaintiff’s early subjective lay person’s belief that a furnace caused the injury was contradicted by examining physicians, the cause of action against the furnace company did not accrue until the plaintiff’s suspicion was confirmed by later medical diagnosis. Borello v. U.S. Oil Co., 130 Wis. 2d 397, 388 N.W.2d 140 (1986).
893.04 AnnotationClaimed ignorance of, and a blatant failure to follow, applicable regulations cannot be construed as reasonable diligence in discovering an injury when following the rules would have resulted in earlier discovery. Stroh Die Casting Co. v. Monsanto Co., 177 Wis. 2d 91, 502 N.W.2d 132 (Ct. App. 1993).
893.04 AnnotationThe day upon which a cause of action accrues is not included in computing the period of limitation. Pufahl v. Williams, 179 Wis. 2d 104, 506 N.W.2d 747 (1993).
893.04 AnnotationThe discovery rule does not allow a plaintiff to delay the statute of limitations until the extent of the injury is known. The statute begins to run when the plaintiff has sufficient evidence that a wrong has been committed by an identified person. Pritzlaff v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 194 Wis. 2d 302, 533 N.W.2d 780 (1995).
893.04 AnnotationA plaintiff can rely on the discovery rule only if the plaintiff has exercised reasonable diligence. Jacobs v. Nor-Lake, Inc., 217 Wis. 2d 625, 579 N.W.2d 254 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-1740.
893.04 AnnotationThe discovery rule applies to statutes of limitations that limit the time to sue from the time when the action “accrues,” being the time of discovery. The discovery rule does not apply to a statute of repose, a statute that specifies the time of accrual and limits the time suit can be brought from that specified date. Tomczak v. Bailey, 218 Wis. 2d 245, 578 N.W.2d 166 (1998), 95-2733.
893.04 AnnotationThe discovery rule does not extend to causes of action not sounding in tort. State v. Chrysler Outboard Corp., 219 Wis. 2d 130, 580 N.W.2d 203 (1998), 96-1158.
893.04 AnnotationKnowing that a particular product caused an injury, an injured party cannot extend the accrual date for a cause of action against the product’s manufacturer due to the subsequent discovery of possible connections between that product and another manufacturer’s product in causing the injury. Baldwin v. Badger Mining Corp., 2003 WI App 95, 264 Wis. 2d 301, 663 N.W.2d 382, 02-1197.
893.04 AnnotationThe discovery rule permits the accrual of both survival claims and wrongful death claims to occur after the date of the decedent’s death. In the absence of a legislatively created rule to the contrary, these claims accrue when there is a claim capable of present enforcement, a suable party against whom it may be enforced, and a party who has a present right to enforce it. Christ v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 2015 WI 58, 362 Wis. 2d 668, 866 N.W.2d 602, 12-1493.
893.04 AnnotationDiscovery occurs when the plaintiff has information that would constitute the basis for an objective belief as to the plaintiff’s injury and its cause. The degree of certainty that constitutes sufficient knowledge is variable, depending on the particular facts and circumstances of the plaintiff. With corporate players, a different quantum of expertise and knowledge is in play. Wisconsin courts have recognized that ignorance is a less compelling excuse for corporate enterprises in the context of the discovery rule. KDC Foods, Inc. v. Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A., 763 F.3d 743 (2014).
893.04 AnnotationComputing Time in Tort Statutes of Limitation. Ghiardi. 64 MLR 575 (1981).
893.04 AnnotationComputing Time in Statutes of Limitation. Ghiardi. Wis. Law. Mar. 1993.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Donald Christ v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 2015 WI 58 (Wis. 2015).
Donald Christ v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 2015 WI 58 (Wis. 2015). “Standard of Review ¶82 This case involves interpreting and applying Wis. Stat. § 893.04 , in regard to Wis. Stat.”
Landis v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc., 2001 WI 86 (Wis. 2001). “" [3] Wis. Stat. § 893.04 ; see also majority op.”
State v. Hamilton, 2003 WI 50 (Wis. 2003). “323, Laws of 1979, and new provisions, including Wis. Stat. §§ 893.04 and 893.40, were created.”
Wenke Ex Rel. Laufenberg v. Gehl Co., 2004 WI 103 (Wis. 2004). “" Wis. Stat. § 893.04 (emphasis added). Statutes of repose are precisely the type of period of limitation that is "otherwise specifically prescribed by law," since a limitation period based upon computation from some primary event or conduct by a defendant does not necessarily…”
Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 565 N.W.2d 94 (Wis. 1997). “Wis. Stat. § 893.04 . [21] The legislature has concluded, as evidenced by statute, that persons who are victimized as children have an extended opportunity to file their claims.”
Pufahl v. Williams, 506 N.W.2d 747 (Wis. 1993). “893.04, Stats., requires the accrual date to be included for time computation purposes.”
Paul v. Skemp, 2001 WI 42 (Wis. 2001). “The running of the statute of limitations turns on when the claims accrue, as compared to when the action is filed.”
Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 601 N.W.2d 627 (Wis. 1999). “Wis. Stat. §§ 893.04 and 893.54. 6 The question thus becomes: When did the plaintiffs' cause of action to recover damages for mesothelioma accrue? "This court has the power to establish when claims accrue.”
Hailey Marie-Joe Force v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 WI 82 (Wis. 2014). “§ 893.04 (2)? Is two years long enough, if there has been absolutely no communication between the spouses? Furthermore, how does the majority opinion line up with spousal intestate succession under Wis.”
Tensfeldt v. Haberman, 2009 WI 77 (Wis. 2009). “To resolve this dispute, it is sufficient to conclude that it was unlawful for Robert to violate the court order between 1980 and 1992.”
Byrne v. Bercker, 501 N.W.2d 402 (Wis. 1993). “[4] Section 893.04, Stats., provides in part: .”
Segall v. Hurwitz, 339 N.W.2d 333 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “Accrual Of Cause Of Action Section 893.04, Stats., provides, “Unless otherwise specifically prescribed by law, a period of limitation within which an action may be commenced is computed from the time that the cause of action accrues until the action is commenced.”
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.