809.83 Rule (Penalties for delay or noncompliance with rules).

(1) Delay; extra costs and damages.

(a) If the court finds that an appeal was taken for the purpose of delay, it may award any of the following:

1. Double costs.

2. A penalty in addition to interest not exceeding 10 percent on the amount of the judgment affirmed.

3. Damages occasioned by the delay.

4. Reasonable attorney fees.

(b) A motion for costs, penalties, damages and fees under this subsection shall be filed no later than the filing of the respondent's brief or, if a cross-appeal is filed, the cross-respondent's brief.

(2) Noncompliance with rules. Failure of a person to comply with a court order or with a requirement of these rules, other than the timely filing of a notice of appeal or cross-appeal, does not affect the jurisdiction of the court over the appeal but is grounds for dismissal of the appeal, summary reversal, striking of a paper, imposition of a penalty or costs on a party or counsel, or other action as the court considers appropriate.

History: Sup. Ct. Order, 83 Wis. 2d xiii (1978); Sup. Ct. Order, 151 Wis. 2d xvii (1989); 1995 a. 225; Sup. Ct. Order No. 00-02, 2001 WI 39, 242 Wis. 2d xxvii.

Judicial Council Committee's Note, 1978: Former ss. 251.22, 251.23, 251.51, 251.56, 251.57, 251.73, 251.75, 251.77, 251.81, 251.82, 251.85 and 251.89, providing for specific penalties for delay and for certain rule violations, are replaced. In the event of a rule violation, the court is authorized to take such action as it considers appropriate. If the court finds an appeal was taken for purposes of delay, it can impose one or more of the four types of penalties specified in sub. (1). [Re Order effective July 1, 1978]

Judicial Council Note, 2001: Subsection (2) is changed to allow appellate courts to sanction parties who violate court orders. [Re Order No. 00-02 effective July 1, 2001]

The untimely service of a petition filed under s. 808.10 does not affect jurisdiction, but the opposing party may move to dismiss under s. 809.83 (2). State v. Rhone, 94 Wis. 2d 682, 288 N.W.2d 862 (1980).

Summary reversal of a dismissal order as a sanction under sub. (2) entitled the plaintiffs to a trial without consideration of the issue that resulted in the dismissal. State ex rel. Blackdeer v. Town of Levis, 176 Wis. 2d 252, N.W.2d (Ct. App. 1993).

To dismiss an appeal under sub. (2), there must be demonstrated egregious conduct or bad faith on the party's or attorney's part. In certain cases attorney bad faith may be imputed to the party, but the attorney conduct should involve the same litigation. It was improper to consider an attorney's repeated requests for time extensions in other cases in denying a motion and dismissing the appeal. State v. Smythe, 225 Wis. 2d 456, 592 N.W.2d 628 (1999), 97-3191.

The court of appeals may not grant summary reversal of a circuit court order on appeal as a sanction without a finding of bad faith, egregious conduct, or a litigant's abandonment of the appeal. Raz v. Brown, 2003 WI 29, 260 Wis. 2d 614, 660 N.W.2d 647, 01-2436.