Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

08-CV-693 Mirbeau of Geneva Lake, LLC, v. City of Lake Geneva

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 28, 2010//

08-CV-693 Mirbeau of Geneva Lake, LLC, v. City of Lake Geneva

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 28, 2010//

Listen to this article

Torts
Tortious interference with contract; statute of limitations

The statute of limitations for tortious interference with contract is two years under sec. 893.57.

“The jurisprudence of the Wisconsin Supreme Court casts doubts on the legal efficacy of the interpretation of § 893.57 made by the plaintiff, and assumed to be true by the court, in Turner. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in Beloit Liquidating Trust v. Grade, 2004 WI 39, 70 Wis. 2d 356; 677 N.W.2d 298 (2004), concluded that what the Turner court assumed to be law – that only intentional torts that were of a personal nature had a limitations period governed by § 893.57 – was indeed not the law. Specifically, the Grade court held that ‘the two-year statute of limitations set forth in Wis. Stat. § 893.57 is applicable, because a breach of fiduciary duty claim involves an intentional tort.’ Id. ¶ 40. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in interpreting § 893.57, seems to discard the words ‘to the person’ in the statute and allows § 893.57 to dictate the controlling limitations period for all intentional torts, even those of an economic nature. Id. (holding that Wis. Stat. § 893.57 is the relevant statute of limitations for a breach of fiduciary duty); see also Jones v. Secura Ins. Co., 2002 WI 11, ¶ 23, 249 Wis. 2d 623; 638 N.W.2d 575 (2002) (holding that § 893.57 governs the intentional tort of insurer bad faith); Warmka v. Hartland Cicero Mut. Ins. Co., 136 Wis. 2d 31, 36, 400 N.W.2d 923 (1987) (same); see generally Gouger v. Hardtke, 167 Wis. 2d 504, 511, 482 N.W.2d 84 (1992) (‘[T]he statute of limitations for an intentional tort is two years.’). ‘In a case in federal court in which state law provides the rule of decision, the federal court must predict how the state’s highest court would decide the case and decide it in the same way.’ Mindgames, Inc. v. W. Publ’g Co., 218 F.3d 652, 655 (7th Cir. 2000). Here, all of the relevant case law indicates that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would find that § 893.57 provides the limitations period for a tortious interference with contractual relations claim, and this court holds as such.”

08-CV-693 Mirbeau of Geneva Lake, LLC, v. City of Lake Geneva

E.D.Wis., J.P. Stadtmueller, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests