Wisconsin Supreme Court Provides Clarity, Stability To Landlord-Tenant Law

The Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a significant decision on June 5, 2026, in Koble Investments v. Marquardt, overturning the Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision and providing clarity and stability to landlord-tenant law. Reinhart attorneys filed a brief on behalf of several interested nonparties in support of the position that prevailed.

Background

Koble Investments sought to evict Elicia Marquardt during the COVID-19 eviction moratorium, and Marquardt asserted counterclaims, including that her lease was unlawful.

After initial litigation in the lower court, the Court of Appeals held, for the first time, that the Wisconsin Consumer Act (WCA) applies to residential leases. The Court of Appeals further held that because the lease was unlawful, Marquardt was entitled to recover twice her damages under Wis. Stat. §100.20(5), which included all rent paid under the unlawful lease.

The Court of Appeals decision spurred a cottage industry of litigation in which tenants sought out lease violations—real or imagined—and attempted to certify classes and recover twice the rent paid under the lease.

The Supreme Court’s Decision

On June 5, 2026, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and provided several critical holdings that clarify landlord-tenant law and the potential damages available to tenants.

Specifically, the Court held the WCA does not apply to residential leases that pay rent on a monthly basis because rent is not due upfront but instead accrues monthly. As such, there is no “agreement to defer payment,” which the WCA requires.

Additionally, the Court clarified that if there is an unlawful lease provision in a residential lease, a tenant may recover damages resulting from his or her pecuniary loss under Wis. Stat. §100.20(5). However, that pecuniary loss must have been suffered as a result of the unlawful lease provision. In other words, all rent paid under a lease with an unlawful provision is not the appropriate measurement of damages. Tenants must instead demonstrate how they have been harmed before recovering double damages.

Open Question

Under the Supreme Court’s decision, there remains a possibility that the WCA may apply to a residential lease that is not paid on a monthly basis. Two justices, Justice Bradley and Justice Ziegler, filed a concurring opinion in which they stated that they would have held that the WCA can never apply to a residential lease. However, both justices will be leaving the Supreme Court by 2027, so it remains to be seen how a future court may address this open question.

Nonparty Briefing

Third parties who have an interest in the outcome of an appeal may be granted the ability to file their own briefs. Although parties in an appeal are often required to address a few limited legal issues that are being reviewed on appeal, nonparties often have broader leeway to address policy arguments that may be helpful in deciding the case.

Reinhart attorneys represented several nonparties in this case, arguing in a brief that the Court of Appeals decision should be overturned and noting the significant adverse effects on the Wisconsin rental market—for both landlords and tenants—if the Court of Appeals case was not overturned. Justice Bradley’s concurring opinion cited that brief.

Conclusion

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision represents a significant win for landlords in Wisconsin, providing clarity and stability regarding the laws that apply to residential leases and rental agreements. This clarity and stability protect the rental market as a whole and avoids tightening of the rental stock and rising rents that would have harmed tenants as well had the Court of Appeals’ decision stood. However, landlords should remain diligent in ensuring that they are familiar with Wisconsin law and that their leases are lawful.

Additionally, companies that are aware of cases that are being appealed that may affect their interests may be interested in discussing the value in seeking leave to file a nonparty brief.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.