Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 990.04 (2026)

Actions pending not defeated by repeal of statute

✓ current as of July 2026

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

990.04990.04 Actions pending not defeated by repeal of statute. The repeal of a statute hereafter shall not remit, defeat or impair any civil or criminal liability for offenses committed, penalties or forfeitures incurred or rights of action accrued under such statute before the repeal thereof, whether or not in course of prosecution or action at the time of such repeal; but all such offenses, penalties, forfeitures and rights of action created by or founded on such statute, liability wherefore shall have been incurred before the time of such repeal thereof, shall be preserved and remain in force notwithstanding such repeal, unless specially and expressly remitted, abrogated or done away with by the repealing statute. And criminal prosecutions and actions at law or in equity founded upon such repealed statute, whether instituted before or after the repeal thereof, shall not be defeated or impaired by such repeal but shall, notwithstanding such repeal, proceed to judgment in the same manner and to the like purpose and effect as if the repealed statute continued in full force to the time of final judgment thereon, unless the offenses, penalties, forfeitures or rights of action on which such prosecutions or actions shall be founded shall be specially and expressly remitted, abrogated or done away with by such repealing statute.

990.04 AnnotationThis section also applies to statutes that are amended after the commission of an alleged criminal act although before trial. Truesdale v. State, 60 Wis. 2d 481, 210 N.W.2d 726 (1973).

990.04 AnnotationAbsent legislative intent to the contrary, repeal of a statute governing appeals of tax assessments did not affect a taxpayer whose right to appeal under the statute accrued prior to its repeal. Jackson County Iron Co. v. Musolf, 134 Wis. 2d 95, 396 N.W.2d 323 (1986).

990.04 AnnotationThis section provides that although the state need not have commenced a prosecution at the time of the repeal, it is necessary that by the time of the repeal, the offender has committed the offense and thereby become subject to the penalty for the offense. A defendant has not committed an offense unless all the elements of that crime have been met. Thus, he or she incurs no penalties until that time. State v. Thums, 2006 WI App 173, 295 Wis. 2d 664, 721 N.W.2d 729, 05-2682.

990.04 AnnotationCiting Waddell v. Mamat, 271 Wis. 176 (1955), the court held that this section applies to a fully accrued right, not to a merely inchoate right that could ripen into a right preserved by the statute only upon the happening of a further event. Trinity Petroleum, Inc. v. Scott Oil Company, Inc., 2006 WI App 219, 296 Wis. 2d 666, 724 N.W. 2d 259, 05-2837.

990.04 AnnotationReversed on other grounds. (See footnote 35.) 2007 WI 88, 302 Wis. 2d 299, 735 N.W.2d 1, 05-2837.

990.04 AnnotationA law is retroactive if it takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under existing laws or creates a new obligation, imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect to transactions or considerations already past. A statute does not operate retroactively simply because it is applied in a case arising from conduct antedating the statute’s enactment or upsets expectations based on prior law. The mere expectation of a future benefit or contingent interest does not create a vested right. In this case, because the appellant did not have a vested right to the interest rate that applied in s. 807.01 (4) before that statute was amended, this section was not implicated. Lands’ End, Inc. v. City of Dodgeville, 2016 WI 64, 370 Wis. 2d 500, 881 N.W.2d 702, 15-0179.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 29 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1959–2022 · leading case: Lands' End, Inc. v. City of Dodgeville, 2016 WI 64 (Wis. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lands' End, Inc. v. City of Dodgeville, 2016 WI 64 (Wis. 2016). · cites it 81× “01 (4) (2009-10) at the time it made its offer of settlement, and violated Wis. Stat. § 990.04 (2013-14) and the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions.”

Trinity Petroleum, Inc. v. Scott Oil Co., 2007 WI 88 (Wis. 2007). · cites it 46× “025 is a substantive claim that accrued prior to July 1, 2005; (2) it fails to analyze the effect of Wis. Stat. § 990.04 and Supreme Court Order 03-06 on Scott's § 814.”

State v. MacArthur, 2008 WI 72 (Wis. 2008). · cites it 16× “MacArthur relies on Wis. Stat. § 990.04 to support his argument.”

State v. Trujillo, 2005 WI 45 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 14× “We also cited Wis. Stat. § 990.04 [12] for the proposition that "the repeal of a statute shall not remit, defeat, or impair any criminal liability for offenses committed prior thereto unless such criminal liability is specifically and expressly remitted or abrogated by the…”

State v. Hegwood, 335 N.W.2d 399 (Wis. 1983). · cites it 8× “" [3] Sec. 990.04, Stats., [3] provides that the repeal of a statute shall not remit, defeat, or impair any criminal liability for offenses committed prior thereto unless such criminal liability is specifically and expressly remitted or abrogated by the repealing statute.”

State Ex Rel. State Pub. Def. v. Percy, 294 N.W.2d 528 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 10× “, of the new code are clearly inapplicable, when read in light of sec. 990.04, Stats., to a transfer of custody to the department under sec.”

Trinity Petroleum, Inc. v. Scott Oil Co., 2006 WI App 219 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 16× “§ 990.04 "unambiguously require[s]" using the repealed statutes, since the new WIS.”

Dane Cnty. DHS v. J. R., 2020 WI App 5 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 20× “§ 990.04, the prior version of WIS. STAT.”

State v. Hermann, 474 N.W.2d 906 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 7× “In essence, sec. 990.04, Stats., provides that criminal prosecutions shall proceed to judgment in the same manner as if the repealed statute continued in full force.”

United States v. Acacia Mental Health Clinic, LLC, 836 F.3d 770 (7th Cir. 2016). “However, under Wisconsin law, "[t]he repeal of a statute hereafter shall not remit, defeat or impair any civil or criminal liability for offenses committed, penalties or forfeitures incurred or rights of action accrued under such statute before the repeal thereof.”

State v. Barfell, 2010 WI App 61 (Wis. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 11× “017 (2)(a) does not render its application moot for a sentencing that occurred prior to the effective date of the budget bill; (2) under Wis. Stat. § 990.04 , a statute's repeal does not defeat Barfell's rights of action; (3) the repeal of § 973.”

Boynton Cab Co. v. Dep't of Indus., Labor & Human Relations, 291 N.W.2d 850 (Wis. 1980). · cites it 2× “2d 142 (1979); see also sec. 990.04, Stats. All references in the balance of this opinion to sec.”

Show all 29 citing cases →

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.