Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 895.45 (2026)

Service representatives for adult abusive conduct complainants

✓ current as of July 2026

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

895.45895.45 Service representatives for adult abusive conduct complainants.

895.45(1)(1) Definitions. In this section:

895.45(1)(a)(a) “Abusive conduct” means domestic abuse, as defined under s. 49.165 (1) (a), 813.12 (1) (am), or 968.075 (1) (a), harassment, as defined under s. 813.125 (1) (am) 4., sexual exploitation by a therapist under s. 940.22, sexual assault under s. 940.225, child abuse, as defined under s. 813.122 (1) (a), or child abuse under ss. 948.02 to 948.11.

895.45(1)(b)(b) “Complainant” means an adult who alleges that he or she was the subject of abusive conduct or who alleges that a crime has been committed against him or her.

895.45(1)(c)(c) “Service representative” means an individual member of an organization or victim assistance program who provides counseling or support services to complainants or petitioners and charges no fee for services provided to a complainant under sub. (2) or to a petitioner under s. 813.122.

895.45(2)(2) Right to be present. A complainant has the right to select a service representative to attend, with the complainant, hearings, depositions and court proceedings, whether criminal or civil, and all interviews and meetings related to those hearings, depositions and court proceedings, if abusive conduct is alleged to have occurred against the complainant or if a crime is alleged to have been committed against the complainant and if the abusive conduct or the crime is a factor under s. 767.41 or is a factor in the complainant’s ability to represent his or her interest at the hearing, deposition or court proceeding. The complainant shall notify the court orally, or in writing, of that selection. A service representative selected by a complainant has the right to be present at every hearing, deposition and court proceeding and all interviews and meetings related to those hearings, depositions and court proceedings that the complainant is required or authorized to attend. The service representative selected by the complainant has the right to sit adjacent to the complainant and confer orally and in writing with the complainant in a reasonable manner during every hearing, deposition or court proceeding and related interviews and meetings, except when the complainant is testifying or is represented by private counsel. The service representative may not sit at counsel table during a jury trial. The service representative may address the court if permitted to do so by the court.

895.45(3)(3) Failure to exercise right not grounds for appeal. The failure of a complainant to exercise a right under this section is not a ground for an appeal of a judgment of conviction or for any court to reverse or modify a judgment of conviction.

895.45 HistoryHistory: 1991 a. 276; 1995 a. 220; 2001 a. 109; 2005 a. 155 s. 64; Stats. 2005 s. 895.45; 2005 a. 443 s. 265; 2007 a. 20; 2015 a. 253; 2021 a. 76.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 32 cases, 1977–2019 · leading case: Yotvat v. Roth, 290 N.W.2d 524 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Yotvat v. Roth, 290 N.W.2d 524 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 27× “The court found that plaintiffs failed to state a claim because they failed to allege compliance with sec. 895.45, Stats., which provides in relevant part: (1) No civil action or civil proceeding may be brought against any state officer, employe or agent for or on account of any…”

J.F. Ahern Co. v. Wisconsin State Bldg. Comm'n, 336 N.W.2d 679 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 16× “Should the trial court have dismissed the claims against Brown and Dunn for plaintiffs’ failure to serve notice on the Attorney General as required by sec. 895.45, Stats. 1975? 3. Do plaintiffs have standing ? 4.”

Mannino v. Davenport, 299 N.W.2d 823 (Wis. 1981). · cites it 16× “Mannino and that the plaintiffs’ action was barred by the failure to give proper notice under sec. 895.45, Stats. 2 *605 The supporting affidavits submitted in conjunction with the motions indicated that Dr.”

Doe v. Ellis, 309 N.W.2d 375 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 14× “The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the trial court was correct in concluding that plaintiff was required to serve notice of his claim upon the attorney general pursuant to sec. 895.45, Stats. (1977), 1 as a condition precedent to the bringing of this action.”

Sambs v. City of Brookfield, 293 N.W.2d 504 (Wis. 1980). · cites it 6× “, or $100,000 liability in sec. 895.45, Stats. It is unreasonable for the legislature to take its chances in the area of automobile accidents, yet abruptly limit the liability for identical injuries caused by a highway defect.”

Riccitelli v. Broekhuizen, 595 N.W.2d 392 (Wis. 1999). · cites it 4× “2d 823 (1981)(discussing Wis. Stat. § 895.45 (1977), now Wis. Stat.”

Colby v. Columbia Cnty., 550 N.W.2d 124 (Wis. 1996). · cites it 4× “1980), which construed then Wis. Stat. § 895.45 (1), the Claims Against State Employees Statute, holding: Section 895.”

Maple Grove Country Club Inc. v. Maple Grove Estates Sanitary Dist., 926 N.W.2d 184 (Wis. 2019). · cites it 2× “(5m), no civil action or civil proceeding may be brought against any state officer, employee or agent for or on account of any act growing out of or committed in the course of the discharge of the officer's, employee's or agent's duties, and no civil action or civil proceeding…”

Modica v. Verhulst, 536 N.W.2d 466 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 5× “82(2m) was added, providing that "No claimant may bring an action against a state officer, employe or agent unless the claimant complies strictly with the requirements of this section.”

Tierney v. Lacenski, 338 N.W.2d 320 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 5× “, (formerly sec. 895.45, Stats.,) 2 requires the dismissal-of Tierney’s action against the state employee’s liability insurance carrier.”

Elm Park Iowa, Inc. v. Denniston, 286 N.W.2d 5 (Wis. 1979). · cites it 6× “The sole issue on this appeal is whether a complaint against state employees must comply with sec. 895.45, Stats., when alleging an intentional tort of continuing conspiracy even though its allegations maintain that all the acts of conspiracy were beyond “the scope of employment…”

Miller v. Smith, 302 N.W.2d 468 (Wis. 1981). · cites it 3× “The respondent then commenced an in 'personam, action against John Doe, an unknown employee of the state of Wisconsin, 1 pursuant to sec. 895.45, Stats. 1977, 2 alleg *612 ing that he, while acting within the scope of his employment as an usher at the State Fair Park,…”

Show all 32 citing cases →

— Wis. Stat. § 895.45(1) — 11 cases

Yotvat v. Roth, 290 N.W.2d 524 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). “The court found that plaintiffs failed to state a claim because they failed to allege compliance with sec. 895.45, Stats., which provides in relevant part: (1) No civil action or civil proceeding may be brought against any state officer, employe or agent for or on account of any…”

J.F. Ahern Co. v. Wisconsin State Bldg. Comm'n, 336 N.W.2d 679 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “Should the trial court have dismissed the claims against Brown and Dunn for plaintiffs’ failure to serve notice on the Attorney General as required by sec. 895.45, Stats. 1975? 3. Do plaintiffs have standing ? 4.”

Doe v. Ellis, 309 N.W.2d 375 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). “The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the trial court was correct in concluding that plaintiff was required to serve notice of his claim upon the attorney general pursuant to sec. 895.45, Stats. (1977), 1 as a condition precedent to the bringing of this action.”

Mannino v. Davenport, 299 N.W.2d 823 (Wis. 1981). “Mannino and that the plaintiffs’ action was barred by the failure to give proper notice under sec. 895.45, Stats. 2 *605 The supporting affidavits submitted in conjunction with the motions indicated that Dr.”

Colby v. Columbia Cnty., 550 N.W.2d 124 (Wis. 1996). “1980), which construed then Wis. Stat. § 895.45 (1), the Claims Against State Employees Statute, holding: Section 895.”

— Wis. Stat. § 895.45(4) — 6 cases

Sambs v. City of Brookfield, 293 N.W.2d 504 (Wis. 1980). “, or $100,000 liability in sec. 895.45, Stats. It is unreasonable for the legislature to take its chances in the area of automobile accidents, yet abruptly limit the liability for identical injuries caused by a highway defect.”

Cords v. Anderson, 259 N.W.2d 672 (Wis. 1977).

Tierney v. Lacenski, 338 N.W.2d 320 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “, (formerly sec. 895.45, Stats.,) 2 requires the dismissal-of Tierney’s action against the state employee’s liability insurance carrier.”

Hunter v. Sch. Dist. of Gale-Ettrick-Trempealeau, 280 N.W.2d 313 (Wis. Ct. App. 1979).

— Wis. Stat. § 895.45(l)(a) — 1 case

Carney v. White, 843 F. Supp. 462 (E.D. Wis. 1994).

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.