893.82 Claims against state employes; notice of claim; limitation of damages.
SUBCHAPTER IX
STATUTES OF LIMITATION; ACTIONS BY THE STATE, STATUTORY LIABILITY AND MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS
893.85 Action concerning old-age assistance lien.
893.86 Action concerning recovery of legal fees paid for indigents.
893.87 General limitation of action in favor of the state.
893.88 Paternity actions.
893.89 Action for injury resulting from improvements to real property.
893.90 Bond; campaign financing; lobbying.
893.91 Action for expenses related to a forest fire.
893.92 Action for contribution.
893.925 Action for certain damages related to mining.
893.93 Miscellaneous actions.
893.94 Organized crime control; civil remedies.
893.95 Unclaimed property; civil remedies.
893.96 Family leave and medical leave; civil remedies.
893.97 Business closing notification.
Ch. 893 Note
NOTE: See the note at the end of this chapter containing indexes to statutes outside this chapter which impose time restrictions on asserting a claim or cause of action and statutes outside this chapter which govern claims against governmental entities.
COMMENCEMENT, COMPUTATION, ACTION IN
NON-WISCONSIN FORUM AND
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
893.01
893.01
Civil actions; objection as to time of commencing. Civil actions may be commenced only within the periods prescribed in this chapter, except when, in special cases, a different limitation is provided by statute. An objection that the action was not commenced within the time limited may only be taken by answer or motion to dismiss under
s. 802.06 (2) in proper cases.
893.01 History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 W (2d) 585, 770 (1975);
1979 c. 323.
893.01 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This section remains from previous ch. 893 and is revised only for purposes of textual clarity. [Bill 326-A]
893.01 Annotation
Estoppel can be invoked to preclude a defense based on a statute of limitations (a) when a defendant has been guilty of fraudulent or inequitable conduct; (b) the conduct need not constitute actual fraud in a technical sense, but may be equivalent to a representation upon which the plaintiff may have relied to his disadvantage by not commencing his action within the statutory period; but (c) must have occurred before the expiration of the limitation period with no unreasonable delay by the aggrieved party after the inducement therefor has ceased to operate. State ex rel. Susedik v. Knutson, 52 W (2d) 593, 191 NW (2d) 23.
893.01 Annotation
See note to 801.15, citing Pulchinski v. Strnad, 88 W (2d) 423, 276 NW (2d) 781 (1979).
893.01 Annotation
When limitation period would otherwise expire on legal holiday, 990.001 (4) (b) permits commencement of action on next secular day. Cuisinier v. Sattler, 88 W (2d) 654, 277 NW (2d) 776 (1979).
893.01 Annotation
Retroactivity of statutes of limitations discussed. Betthauser v. Medical Protective Co. 172 W (2d) 141, 493 NW (2d) 40 (1992).
893.01 Annotation
Defendant was estopped from pleading statute of limitations by fraudulent conduct which prevented plaintiff from filing timely suit. Bell v. City of Milwaukee, 746 F (2d) 1205 (1984).
893.02
893.02
Action, when commenced. 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 60 days after filing.
893.02 History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 W (2d) 585, 770 (1975);
1975 c. 218;
1979 c. 323.
893.02 Note
Judicial 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 Annotation
See note to 802.09, citing Wussow v. Commercial Mechanisms, Inc. 97 W (2d) 136, 293 NW (2d) 897 (1980).
893.02 Annotation
Where action against unnamed defendant under 807.12 was filed on last day of limitation period and amended process naming defendant was served within 60 days after filing, action was not barred. Relation back requirements of 802.09 (3) were inapplicable. Lak v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc. 100 W (2d) 641, 302 NW (2d) 483 (1981).
893.02 Annotation
Service of process did not commence action where plaintiff failed to file summons and complaint. Defendant's answer did not waive statute of limitations defense or estop defendant from raising it after limitation period expired. Hester v. Williams, 117 W (2d) 634, 345 NW (2d) 426 (1984).
893.02 Annotation
Fictitiously designated defendant's right to extinction of action doesn't effectively vest until 60 days after statute of limitations runs. Lavine v. Hartford Acc. & Indemnity, 140 W (2d) 434, 410 NW (2d) 623 (Ct. App. 1987).
893.02 Annotation
See note to 227.40, citing Richards v. Young, 150 W (2d) 549, 441 NW (2d) 742 (1989).
893.03
893.03
Presenting claims. The presentation of any claim, in cases where by law such presentment is required, to the circuit court shall be deemed the commencement of an action within the meaning of any law limiting the time for the commencement of an action thereon.
893.03 History
History: 1977 c. 449 s.
497;
1979 c. 323.
893.03 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This section is previous s. 893.41 renumbered for more logical placement in restructured ch. 893. [Bill 326-A]
893.03 Annotation
Statute of limitations is not tolled by filing action in court completely lacking jurisdiction and later refiling in proper court after statute has run. Schafer v. Wegner, 78 W (2d) 127, 254 NW (2d) 193.
893.04
893.04
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 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.04 Note
Judicial 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 Annotation
In attorney malpractice actions as in medical malpractice cases where the date of 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 W (2d) 528, 180 NW (2d) 521.
893.04 Annotation
The loss of the right to a patent is the loss of the right to exclude others and, therefore, the injury occurred on that date the right to a patent was lost. Boehm v. Wheeler, 65 W (2d) 668, 223 NW (2d) 536.
893.04 Annotation
Because 67.11 requires moneys in sinking fund remain inviolate until bonds are retired, cause of action regarding fund could only accrue at retirement. Joint School Dist. No. 1 v. City of Chilton, 78 W (2d) 52, 253 NW (2d) 879.
893.04 Annotation
Tort claim accrues when injury is discovered or reasonably should have been discovered. Court adopts this "discovery rule" for all tort actions other than those already governed by statutory discovery rule. Hansen v. A. H. Robins, Inc. 113 W (2d) 550, 335 NW (2d) 578 (1983).
893.04 Annotation
See note to 893.54, citing Borello v. U.S. Oil Co. 130 W (2d) 397, 388 NW (2d) 140 (1986).
893.04 Annotation
The day upon which a cause of action accrues is not included in computing the period of limitation. Pufahl v. Williams, 179 W (2d) 104, 506 NW (2d) 747 (1993).
893.04 Annotation
Computing time in tort statutes of limitation. Ghiardi, 64 MLR 575 (1981).
893.04 Annotation
Computing Time. Ghiardi. Wis. Law. March 1993.
893.05
893.05
Relation of statute of limitations to right and remedy. When the period within which an action may be commenced on a Wisconsin cause of action has expired, the right is extinguished as well as the remedy.
893.05 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.05 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This new section is a codification of Wisconsin case law. See Maryland Casualty Company v. Beleznay, 245 Wis. 390,
14 N.W. 2d 177 (1944), in which it is stated at page 393: "In Wisconsin the running of the statute of limitations absolutely extinguishes the cause of action for in Wisconsin limitations are not treated as statutes of repose. The limitation of actions is a right as well as a remedy, extinguishing the right on one side and creating a right on the other, which is as of high dignity as regards judicial remedies as any other right and it is a right which enjoys constitutional protection". [Bill 326-A]
893.07
893.07
Application of foreign statutes of limitation. 893.07(1)(1) If an action is brought in this state on a foreign cause of action and the foreign period of limitation which applies has expired, no action may be maintained in this state.
893.07(2)
(2) If an action is brought in this state on a foreign cause of action and the foreign period of limitation which applies to that action has not expired, but the applicable Wisconsin period of limitation has expired, no action may be maintained in this state.
893.07 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.07 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: Sub. (1) applies the provision of s. 893.05 that the running of a statute of limitations extinguishes the right as well as the remedy to a foreign cause of action on which an action is attempted to be brought in Wisconsin in a situation where the foreign period has expired. Sub. (1) changes the law of prior s. 893.205 (1), which provided that a resident of Wisconsin could sue in this state on a foreign cause of action to recover damages for injury to the person even if the foreign period of limitation had expired.
893.07 Annotation
Sub. (2) applies the Wisconsin statute of limitations to a foreign cause of action if the Wisconsin period is shorter than the foreign period and the Wisconsin period has run. [Bill 326-A]
893.07 Annotation
Borrowing statute properly applied to injury received without this state; conflict of laws analysis was not appropriate. Guertin v. Harbour Assur. Co. 141 W (2d) 622, 415 NW (2d) 831 (1987).
893.07 Annotation
See note to 893.16, citing Scott v. First State Ins. Co. 155 W (2d) 608, 456 NW (2d) 312 (1990).
893.07 Annotation
This section refers to periods of limitations, not periods of repose. Leverence v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty, 158 W (2d) 64, 462 NW (2d) 218 (Ct. App. 1990).
893.07 Annotation
This section does not borrow foreign tolling statutes. Johnson v. Johnson, 179 W (2d) 574, 508 NW (2d) 19 (Ct. App. 1993).
893.07 Annotation
Tort action based on injury received outside state was "foreign". Johnson v. Deltadynamics, Inc. 813 F (2d) 944 (7th Cir. 1987).
893.07 Annotation
A tort action is foreign for purposes of this section when the injury giving rise to liability is incurred outside this state. Terranova v. Terranova, 883 F Supp. 1273 (1995).
893.07 Annotation
Under this section, foreign jurisdiction's period of limitations is borrowed, but not its period of repose. Beard v. J. I. Case Co. 823 F (2d) 1095 (7th Cir. 1987).
893.07 Annotation
Wisconsin's borrowing statute: Did we shortchange ourselves? 70 MLR 120 (1986).
LIMITATIONS TOLLED OR EXTENDED
893.10
893.10
Actions, time for commencing. The period within which an action may be commenced shall not be considered to have expired when the court before which the action is pending is satisfied that the person originally served knowingly gave false information to the officer with intent to mislead the officer in the performance of his or her duty in the service of any summons or civil process. If the court so finds, the period of limitation is extended for one year.
893.10 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.10 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This section is previous s. 893.14 renumbered for more logical placement in restructured ch. 893. [Bill 326-A]
893.11
893.11
Extension of time if no person to sue. The fact that there is no person in existence who is authorized to bring an action on a cause of action at the time it accrues shall not extend the time within which, according to this chapter, an action may be commenced upon the cause of action to more than double the period otherwise prescribed by law.
893.11 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.11 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This section is previous s. 893.50 renumbered for more logical placement in restructured ch. 893 and revised for the purpose of textual clarity only. [Bill 326-A]
893.12
893.12
Advance payment of damages; limitation extended. The period fixed for the limitation for the commencement of actions, if a payment is made as described in
s. 885.285 (1), shall be either the period of time remaining under the original statute of limitations or 3 years from the date of the last payment made under
s. 885.285 (1), whichever is greater.
893.12 History
History: 1979 c. 323.
893.12 Note
Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1979: This section is created to place the statute extending statute of limitations when there has been a settlement and advance payment of claim for damages into the subchapter of chapter 893 on extension of statute of limitations. The provisions of prior s. 885.285 (4) are contained without change in newly created s. 893.12. [Bill 326-A]
893.12 Annotation
Property payment under 885.285 (1) extends limitation under 893.12, but only if made within 3-year limit of 893.54 (1). Abraham v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. 115 W (2d) 678, 341 NW (2d) 414 (Ct. App. 1983).
893.12 Annotation
Section does not apply to foreign cause of action; 893.07 (1) prevents 893.12 from extending foreign statutes of limitation. Thimm v. Automatic Sprinkler Corp. 148 W (2d) 332, 434 NW (2d) 842 (Ct. App. 1988).
893.12 Annotation
Tolling provision applies only to party that received settlement or advance payment under 885.285; it does not apply to stranger to settlement. Riley v. Doe, 152 W (2d) 766, 449 NW (2d) 83 (Ct. App. 1989).
893.12 Annotation
For a period of limitations to be extended under this section as the result of a "payment" by check, the check must be accepted and negotiated. Parr v. Milwaukee Bldg. & Const. Trades, 177 W (2d) 140, 501 NW (2d) 858 (Ct. App. 1993).
893.12 Annotation
To be a payment under s. 885.285 which will toll or extend the statute of limitations, a payment must be related to fault or liability. Gurney v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co. 188 W (2d) 68, 523 NW (2d) 193 (Ct. App. 1994).
893.13
893.13
Tolling of statutes of limitation. 893.13(1)
(1) In this section and
ss. 893.14 and
893.15 "final disposition" means the end of the period in which an appeal may be taken from a final order or judgment of the trial court, the end of the period within which an order for rehearing can be made in the highest appellate court to which an appeal is taken, or the final order or judgment of the court to which remand from an appellate court is made, whichever is latest.
893.13(2)
(2) A law limiting the time for commencement of an action is tolled by the commencement of the action to enforce the cause of action to which the period of limitation applies. The law limiting the time for commencement of the action is tolled for the period from the commencement of the action until the final disposition of the action.
893.13(3)
(3) If a period of limitation is tolled under
sub. (2) by the commencement of an action and the time remaining after final disposition in which an action may be commenced is less than 30 days, the period within which the action may be commenced is extended to 30 days from the date of final disposition.
