Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (2026)

Miscellaneous actions

✓ current as of July 2026

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

893.93893.93 Miscellaneous actions.

893.93(1)(1) The following actions shall be commenced within 6 years after the cause of action accrues or be barred:

893.93(1)(c)(c) An action upon a claim, whether arising on contract or otherwise, against a decedent or against a decedent’s estate, unless probate of the estate in this state is commenced within 6 years after the decedent’s death.

893.93(1)(cm)(cm) An action under s. 218.0125 (7) or 218.0126.

893.93(1)(d)(d) An action under s. 968.31.

893.93(1)(e)(e) An action under s. 895.444.

893.93(1m)(1m) The following actions shall be commenced within 3 years after the cause of action accrues or be barred:

893.93(1m)(a)(a) An action upon a liability created by statute when a different limitation is not prescribed by law.

893.93(1m)(b)(b) An action for relief on the ground of fraud. The cause of action in such case is not deemed to have accrued until the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts constituting the fraud.

893.93(2)(2) The following actions shall be commenced within 2 years after the cause of action accrues or be barred:

893.93(2)(a)(a) An action by a private party upon a statute penalty, or forfeiture when the action is given to the party prosecuting therefor and the state, except when the statute imposing it provides a different limitation.

893.93(2)(b)(b) An action to recover a forfeiture or penalty imposed by any bylaw, ordinance or regulation of any town, county, city or village or of any corporation or limited liability company organized under the laws of this state, when no other limitation is prescribed by law.

893.93(3)(3) The following actions shall be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrues or be barred:

893.93(3)(a)(a) An action against a sheriff or other officer for the escape of a prisoner arrested or imprisoned on civil process.

893.93(3)(b)(b) An action under ch. 135.

893.93(4)(4) An action by a drainage board for damages under s. 88.92 (2) shall be commenced within 3 years after the drainage board discovers the fact, or with the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered the fact of the damage, whichever comes first, or be barred.

893.93 HistoryHistory: 1979 c. 323; 1993 a. 98, 112, 456; 2005 a. 155; 2017 a. 235.

893.93 NoteJudicial Council Committee’s Note, 1979: This section has been created to place in one location within restructured ch. 893 various miscellaneous statutes of limitation for easier reference and use. Sub. (1) (a) is previous s. 893.19 (4). Sub. (1) (b) is previous s. 893.19 (7). Sub. (1) (c) is previous s. 893.19 (9). Sub. (1) (d) is previous s. 893.19 (10). Sub. (2) (a) is previous s. 893.21 (1) with a comma placed after the word “penalty” in order to have the section accurately reflect the decision in Grengs v. 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, 232 F.2d 325 (1956). Sub. (2) (b) is previous s. 893.21 (4). Sub. (3) (a) is previous s. 893.22 (1). Sub. (3) (b) is previous s. 893.22 (3). [Bill 326-A]

893.93 AnnotationIf the complaint does not allege the requisite elements for a cause of action based on fraud, s. 893.19 (7) [now sub. (1m) (b)] does not apply. Demos v. Carey, 50 Wis. 2d 262, 184 N.W.2d 117 (1971).

893.93 AnnotationA complaint alleging employment discrimination on the basis of sex and seeking back-pay damages is an action upon a liability created by statute, and, in the absence of any other applicable limitation, the six-year limitation of s. 893.19 (4) [now sub. (1m) (a)] applies. Yanta v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 66 Wis. 2d 53, 224 N.W.2d 389 (1974).

893.93 AnnotationWhen unreasonable delay in bringing suit prejudices the defendant because of the death of a key witness, laches will bar suit even if the s. 893.19 (7) [now sub. (1m) (b)] statute of limitations does not. Schafer v. Wegner, 78 Wis. 2d 127, 254 N.W.2d 193 (1977).

893.93 AnnotationComplaints under the open meetings law are not brought in the individual capacity of the plaintiff but on behalf of the state, subject to the two-year statute of limitations under sub. (2). State ex rel. Leung v. City of Lake Geneva, 2003 WI App 129, 265 Wis. 2d 674, 666 N.W.2d 104, 02-2747.

893.93 AnnotationSub. (1) (a) [now sub. (1m) (a)] does not apply to a professional disciplinary proceeding, the focus of which is to monitor and supervise the performance of a person who has been granted the privilege of a license in this state. Krahenbuhl v. Wisconsin Dentistry Examining Board, 2004 WI App 147, 275 Wis. 2d 626, 685 N.W.2d 591, 03-2864.

893.93 AnnotationClaims for injury caused by an Archdiocese’s alleged fraudulent misrepresentation that the Archdiocese did not know that priests it assigned had histories of sexually abusing children and did not know the priests were dangerous to children were independent claims based on the Archdiocese’s alleged knowledge of the priests’ prior sexual molestation of children and the Archdiocese’s intent to deceive children and their families and not derivative of the underlying sexual molestations by the priests. The date of the accrual of the fraud claims was when the plaintiffs discovered or, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered that the Archdiocese’s alleged fraud was a cause of their injuries. Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95, 303 Wis. 2d 34, 734 N.W.2d 827, 05-1945.

893.93 AnnotationIt is not necessary that a defrauded party have knowledge of the ultimate fact of fraud. What is required is that it be in possession of such essential facts as will, if diligently investigated, disclose the fraud. The burden of diligent inquiry is upon the defrauded party as soon as the party has such information as indicates where the facts constituting the fraud can be discovered. Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95, 303 Wis. 2d 34, 734 N.W.2d 827, 05-1945.

893.93 AnnotationThe six-year limitations period found in sub. (1) (a) [now sub. (1m) (a)] applies to actions under the Uniform Fiduciaries Act, s. 112.01. Willowglen Academy-Wisconsin, Inc. v. Connelly Interiors, Inc., 2008 WI App 35, 307 Wis. 2d 776, 746 N.W.2d 570, 07-1178.

893.93 AnnotationThe limitation period under sub. (1) (b) [now sub. (1m) (b)] was tolled when the victim had “sufficient knowledge to make a reasonable person aware of the need for diligent investigation.” Stockman v. LaCroix, 790 F.2d 584 (1986).

893.93 AnnotationA cause of action under sub. (1) (b) [now sub. (1m) (b)] accrues on the discovery of the fraud. Discovery occurs when the party has knowledge that would cause a reasonable person to make sufficient inquiry to discover the fraud. Owen v. Wangerin, 985 F.2d 312 (1993).

893.93 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).

893.93 AnnotationWisconsin courts have applied the two-year limitations period under sub. (2) (a) to actions that principally benefit the public at large, a “statute penalty,” and the six-year limitations period under sub. (1) (a) to actions that principally benefit the plaintiff at issue. Because a claim under s. 146.83 (3f) (b) is primarily private in nature and does not result in a statute penalty for the public’s benefit, the six-year limitations period of sub. (1) (a) applies. Although s. 146.84 (1) (b) and (bm) authorize exemplary damages, what matters is who, on balance, the cause of action benefits—the private individual or the general public. Smith v. RecordQuest, LLC, 989 F.3d 513 (2021).

893.93 AnnotationSection 551.59 (5) applies to actions arising out of sales of securities under federal Securities and Exchange Commission rules, rather than s. 893.19 (7) [now sub. (1m) (b)]. Kramer v. Loewi & Co., 357 F. Supp. 83 (1973).

893.93 AnnotationSection 893.21 (1) [now sub. (2) (a)] did not control an action by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charging discrimination in employment when the statute limited only acts brought by a “private party” and the commission is a federal agency enforcing public policy. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Laacke & Joys Co., 375 F. Supp. 852 (1974).

893.93 AnnotationSection 893.19 (4) [now sub. (1m) (a)] governs civil rights actions. Minor v. Lakeview Hospital, 421 F. Supp. 485 (1976).

893.93 AnnotationSection 893.19 (4) [now sub. (1m) (a)] governed an action under federal law against an oil refiner for compensatory damages for alleged overcharges. Section 893.21 (1) [now sub. (2) (a)] governed an action for treble damages. U.S. Oil Co. v. Koch Refining Co., 497 F. Supp. 1125 (1980).

893.93 AnnotationThe defendant in a civil rights action was estopped from pleading the statute of limitations when its own fraudulent conduct prevented the plaintiff from timely filing suit. Bell v. City of Milwaukee, 498 F. Supp. 1339 (1980).

893.93 AnnotationAt a minimum, actions for contractual rescission based on negligent or strict responsibility misrepresentation sound in contract, not tort, at least under Wisconsin law, and are not actions “on the ground of fraud” under sub. (1) (b) [now sub. (1m) (b)]. If all misrepresentations—intentional, negligent, and strict responsibility—were “fraudulent,” there would be no need for the second category of “material” misrepresentations. CMFG Life Insurance Co. v. UBS Securities, 30 F. Supp. 3d 822 (2014).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 84 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc., 2008 WI 22 (Wis. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc., 2008 WI 22 (Wis. 2008). · cites it 22× “First, we hold that the Stuarts' HIPA claims and their negligence claims are not barred by the statute of limitations because their claims are governed by the discovery rule and the six-year statute of limitations set forth in Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (1)(b). Second, we are satisfied…”

John Doe 1 v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95 (Wis. 2007). · cites it 18× “¶ 11 The court of appeals also concluded that the fraud claims were barred by Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (1)(b) (2005-06) [6] because the *833 statute of limitations began to run when the facts constituting fraud could have been discovered upon diligent inquiry and under BBB Doe , "the…”

Thomas F. Benson v. City of Madison, 2017 WI 65 (Wis. 2017). · cites it 6× “Under Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (3)(b), "[a]n action under ch.”

Krahenbuhl v. Wisconsin Dentistry Examining Bd., 2004 WI App 147 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 27× “Krahenbuhl contends that the disciplinary action, brought more than six years after the patient treatment that is at issue in this case, is barred by the six-year statute of limitations set forth in Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (l)(a). Krahenbuhl additionally contends that his due…”

Tietsworth v. Harley-Davidson, Inc., 2004 WI 32 (Wis. 2004). · cites it 4× “[2] Although we are not confronted here with a question of *159 when this claim accrued for purposes of a statute of limitations defense, the amended complaint must adequately plead an actual injurya loss or damage that has already occurred or is reasonably certain to occurin…”

Employers Ins. of Wausau v. Smith, 453 N.W.2d 856 (Wis. 1990). · cites it 9× “Sections 893.93(1)(a) and 893.87 declare that an action shall be commenced within six or ten years respectively "after the cause of action accrues.”

South Milwaukee Sav. Bank v. Barrett, 2000 WI 48 (Wis. 2000). · cites it 18× “10 (3) against a clerk of circuit court, alleging that the clerk neglected to docket a judgment at the proper time: Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (l)(a) (1995-96), 2 a six-year statute of limitations, or Wis.”

State v. Simmelink, 2014 WI App 102 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 10× “Simmelink emphasizes that the "should be discovered" requirement also has been adopted for cases involving the civil fraud statute of limitations, Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (l)(b). See Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95, ¶¶ 51, 64 , 303 Wis.”

South Milwaukee Sav. Bank v. Barczak, 600 N.W.2d 205 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 15× “93(l)(a) imposes a six-year statute of limitations on actions upon liabilities "created by statute when a different limitation is not prescribed by law." Section 806.10(3) plainly creates and imposes liability upon any clerk who fails to docket a judgment at the proper time.”

Erdman v. Jovoco, Inc., 512 N.W.2d 487 (Wis. 1994). · cites it 8× “17 Section 893.93. Miscellaneous actions. (2) The following actions shall be commenced within 2 years after the cause of action accrues or be barred: (a) An action by a private party upon a statute penalty, or forfeiture when the action is given to the party prosecuting therefor…”

State v. Chrysler Outboard Corp., 580 N.W.2d 203 (Wis. 1998). · cites it 6× “*144 Chrysler contends that Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (2)(a) (1995-96) applies to the State's claim.”

Schwittay v. Sheboygan Falls Mut. Ins. Co., 2001 WI App 140 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 5× “As such, Sheboygan Falls reasons that the "catchall" six-year statute of limitations set out in Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (l)(a) applies. 2 ¶ 6.”

Show all 84 citing cases →

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1) — 4 cases

Schimpf v. Gerald, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 2d 976 (E.D. Wis. 1999).

Pool v. City of Sheboygan, 2007 WI 38 (Wis. 2007).

Plesko v. Figgie Int'l, 528 N.W.2d 446 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994).

Kenneth C. Grissman v. Est. of John H. Boettcher (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1)(a) — 10 cases

Saldivar v. Cadena, 622 F. Supp. 949 (W.D. Wis. 1985).

Employers Ins. of Wausau v. Smith, 453 N.W.2d 856 (Wis. 1990). “Sections 893.93(1)(a) and 893.87 declare that an action shall be commenced within six or ten years respectively "after the cause of action accrues.”

Kenosha Cnty. v. Town of Paris, 434 N.W.2d 801 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988).

Brittany D. Clarke v. SSM Health Care Corp. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).

Elkhorn Area Sch. Dist. v. East Troy Cmty. Sch. Dist., 377 N.W.2d 627 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1)(b) — 6 cases

John Doe 1 v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95 (Wis. 2007). “¶ 11 The court of appeals also concluded that the fraud claims were barred by Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (1)(b) (2005-06) [6] because the *833 statute of limitations began to run when the facts constituting fraud could have been discovered upon diligent inquiry and under BBB Doe , "the…”

Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc., 2008 WI 22 (Wis. 2008). “First, we hold that the Stuarts' HIPA claims and their negligence claims are not barred by the statute of limitations because their claims are governed by the discovery rule and the six-year statute of limitations set forth in Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (1)(b). Second, we are satisfied…”

Esser Distrib. Co. v. Steidl, 437 N.W.2d 884 (Wis. 1989).

Lewis v. Paul Revere Life Ins., 80 F. Supp. 2d 978 (E.D. Wis. 2000).

Kathleen McCaigue v. Marc A. Messinger (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1)(c) — 1 case

Kenneth C. Grissman v. Est. of John H. Boettcher (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1m)(a) — 1 case

Gersbach v. City of Madison, 927 N.W.2d 927 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(1m)(b) — 2 cases

Kathleen McCaigue v. Marc A. Messinger (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).

Wisconsin Aluminum Foundry Co. Inc v. Whipple Indus. Inc. (E.D. Wis. 2025).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(2) — 3 cases

State Ex Rel. Siu Wing Leung v. City of Lake Geneva, 2003 WI App 129 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003).

Michelle Tauscher v. Acuity, A Mut. Ins. Co. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).

Vill. of Greendale v. Stacey King (Wis. Ct. App. 2024).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(2)(a) — 10 cases

Elbe v. Wausau Hosp. Ctr., 606 F. Supp. 1491 (W.D. Wis. 1985).

South Milwaukee Sav. Bank v. Barczak, 600 N.W.2d 205 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “93(l)(a) imposes a six-year statute of limitations on actions upon liabilities "created by statute when a different limitation is not prescribed by law." Section 806.10(3) plainly creates and imposes liability upon any clerk who fails to docket a judgment at the proper time.”

Derrick J. Hammetter v. Verisma Sys., Inc., 2021 WI App 53 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).

Erdman v. Jovoco, Inc., 512 N.W.2d 487 (Wis. 1994). “17 Section 893.93. Miscellaneous actions. (2) The following actions shall be commenced within 2 years after the cause of action accrues or be barred: (a) An action by a private party upon a statute penalty, or forfeiture when the action is given to the party prosecuting therefor…”

Thomas Fotusky v. ProHealth Care, Inc., 2023 WI App 19 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(2)(b) — 2 cases

Town of Waterford v. Christopher Pye (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).

Vill. of Greendale v. Stacey King (Wis. Ct. App. 2024).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(3) — 1 case

Les Moise, Inc. v. Rossignol Ski Co., Inc., 361 N.W.2d 653 (Wis. 1985).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(3)(b) — 5 cases

Thomas F. Benson v. City of Madison, 2017 WI 65 (Wis. 2017). “Under Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (3)(b), "[a]n action under ch.”

Kinn v. Coast Catamaran Corp., 582 F. Supp. 682 (E.D. Wis. 1984).

Greggar S. Isaksen D/B/A Applewood Stove Works v. Vermont Castings, Inc., 825 F.2d 1158 (7th Cir. 1987).

Process Accessories Co. v. Balston, Inc., 636 F. Supp. 448 (E.D. Wis. 1986).

May v. Wheelabrator Corp., 811 F. Supp. 416 (E.D. Wis. 1993).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(a)(1) — 1 case

McDonough v. Westconsin Credit Union, 97 F. Supp. 3d 1040 (W.D. Wis. 2015).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(b) — 1 case

CMFG Life Ins. v. UBS Sec., 30 F. Supp. 3d 822 (W.D. Wis. 2014).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(l)(a) — 13 cases

Andersen v. Vill. of Little Chute, 549 N.W.2d 737 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996).

Kenosha Cnty. v. Town of Paris, 434 N.W.2d 801 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988).

Jordi v. Sauk Prairie Sch. Bd., 651 F. Supp. 1566 (W.D. Wis. 1987).

— Wis. Stat. § 893.93(l)(b) — 11 cases

Stroh Die Casting Co. v. Monsanto Co., 502 N.W.2d 132 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).

Esser Distrib. Co. v. Steidl, 437 N.W.2d 884 (Wis. 1989).

State v. Simmelink, 2014 WI App 102 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). “Simmelink emphasizes that the "should be discovered" requirement also has been adopted for cases involving the civil fraud statute of limitations, Wis. Stat. § 893.93 (l)(b). See Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 2007 WI 95, ¶¶ 51, 64 , 303 Wis.”

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.