Setting aside a Wisconsin judgment: eight grounds, and only two carry the one-year cap
Wisconsin procedure · Last verified August 17, 2026
Wisconsin's relief-from-judgment statute is unusually generous in one respect and strict in another. It lists eight grounds where most states list five or six, and its catch-all is the plain "any other reasons justifying relief" rather than the narrowed version some states use.
But only two of the eight carry the one-year outer limit — which means the deadline question depends entirely on which letter you are relying on.
The eight grounds
Wis. Stat. § 806.07(1):
On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court, subject to subs. (2) and (3), may relieve a party or legal representative from a judgment, order or stipulation for the following reasons:
(a) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (b) Newly-discovered evidence which entitles a party to a new trial under s. 805.15 (3); (c) Fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (d) The judgment is void; (e) The judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; (f) A prior judgment upon which the judgment is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated; (g) It is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (h) Any other reasons justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.
Two features are worth noting immediately.
The statute reaches stipulations. Not just judgments and orders — "a judgment, order or stipulation." A party who agreed to something and now has grounds to be relieved of it is within the section.
(e) and (f) are separate grounds, where many states combine them into one. That matters if the judgment has been paid but not released of record, or if the judgment it was built on has fallen.
Two clocks, not one
Wis. Stat. § 806.07(2):
The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and, if based on sub. (1) (a) or (c), not more than one year after the judgment was entered or the order or stipulation was made. A motion based on sub. (1) (b) shall be made within the time provided in s. 805.16. A motion under this section does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation. This section does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from judgment, order, or proceeding, or to set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.
| Ground | Outer limit |
|---|---|
| (a) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect | 1 year |
| (c) fraud, misrepresentation, other misconduct | 1 year |
| (b) newly-discovered evidence | the period in s. 805.16 |
| (d) void judgment | reasonable time only |
| (e) satisfied, released, discharged | reasonable time only |
| (f) prior judgment reversed or vacated | reasonable time only |
| (g) no longer equitable prospectively | reasonable time only |
| (h) any other reason justifying relief | reasonable time only |
So the one-year cap binds (a) and (c) only. A void judgment under (d) — the usual result of defective service — is not time-barred by the statute, and neither is the catch-all in (h).
Every ground is still subject to "within a reasonable time", which is a real requirement rather than a formality. The cap is a ceiling, not a license to wait.
Filing does not stop collection
The same subsection is explicit:
A motion under this section does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation.
A pending motion is not a stay. If a garnishment is running, that has to be addressed separately — see Wisconsin earnings garnishment, where returning the answer form to your employer is what actually stops the deduction, and where the garnishment lien ends early "if the underlying judgment is vacated or modified."
That last link is the practical reason to run both at once: the garnishment answer protects the money now, and the § 806.07 motion removes the judgment behind it.
Two powers the statute preserves
The end of subsection (2) keeps older avenues open:
This section does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from judgment, order, or proceeding, or to set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.
Fraud on the court is a separate concept from ground (c) fraud by an adverse party, and it is not confined by the one year.
One exclusion
§ 806.07(3) removes a category entirely:
A motion under this section may not be made by an adoptive parent to relieve the adoptive parent from a judgment or order under s. 48.91 (3) granting adoption of a child. A petition for termination of parental rights under s. 48.42 and an appeal to the court of appeals shall be the exclusive remedies for an adoptive parent who wishes to end his or her parental relationship with his or her adoptive child.
Default judgments specifically
A defaulted defendant is usually in ground (a) — excusable neglect — and therefore inside the one-year cap.
But before reaching for (a), check whether (d) applies instead. Wisconsin's service requirements are strict, and two of them are commonly missed:
- an authenticated copy of the summons and complaint must be served; and
- abode service is available only "if with reasonable diligence the defendant cannot be served" personally, on a competent family member at least 14 years of age or a competent adult residing there, who must be informed of the contents.
And commencement itself is conditional — under § 801.02(1) the action is commenced on filing provided service happens within 90 days. See commencing a Wisconsin lawsuit.
A judgment entered where any of those failed is a candidate for (d), and (d) has no one-year cap.
How Wisconsin compares
| Wisconsin | Minnesota | Colorado | Federal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of grounds | eight | six | five | six |
| Outer limit on mistake / excusable neglect | 1 year | 1 year | 182 days | 1 year |
| Outer limit on fraud | 1 year | 1 year | 182 days | 1 year |
| Void judgment time-limited | no | no | no | no |
| Catch-all wording | "any other reasons justifying relief" | similar | similar | similar |
| Reaches stipulations | yes | — | — | — |
| Motion suspends the judgment | no, expressly | no | no, expressly | no |
A short checklist
- Pick the lettered ground before drafting. The deadline depends on the letter.
- Check (d) before (a). If service was defective the judgment may be void, and (d) carries no one-year cap.
- Count one year from entry if you are relying on (a) mistake or excusable neglect, or (c) fraud.
- Move within a reasonable time regardless. That requirement applies to every ground.
- For newly discovered evidence, check s. 805.16 — (b) runs on that period, not on the year.
- Consider (e) and (f) if the judgment has been paid, or the judgment it rested on has been reversed.
- Remember stipulations are covered — the statute is not limited to judgments.
- Arrange a stay separately. The motion does not suspend the judgment's operation.
- If a garnishment is running, file the employer answer form as well. That is what stops the money while the motion is pending.
Where these rules live
- Wis. Stat. § 801.02 — Commencement of action
- Wis. Stat. § 801.11 — Personal jurisdiction, manner of serving summons
- Wis. Stat. § 801.15 — Time
- Wis. Stat. § 806.02 — Default judgment
- Wis. Stat. § 806.07 — Relief from judgment or order
- Wis. Stat. § 812.37 — Debtor's answer
This page explains what the statute says. It isn't legal advice, and what amounts to excusable neglect under § 806.07(1)(a) is developed in case law this site doesn't cover.