Skip main navigation

Outdated or Unsupported Browser Detected
DWD's website uses the latest technology. This makes our site faster and easier to use across all devices. Unfortunatley, your browser is out of date and is not supported. An update is not required, but it is strongly recommended to improve your browsing experience. To update Internet Explorer to Microsoft Edge visit their website.

211 Coverage, exceptions

There is no express statutory language in the Wisconsin Open Housing Act limiting the right to initiate and prosecute complaints of housing discrimination to persons with any particular threshold level of interest in the violation alleged. The administrative rules promulgated by the Equal Rights Division provide expressly that a complaint may be filed by "any person." Thus, the Equal Rights Division cannot refuse any person the right to file a complaint alleging housing discrimination based on notions of standing. Metro. Milwaukee Fair Hous. Council v. Goetsch (LIRC, 12/06/91).

The Metropolitan Milwaukee Fair Housing Council has standing to challenge unlawfully discriminatory advertisements in newspapers. The Metropolitan Milwaukee Fair Housing Council established that discriminatory advertisements discourage persons seeking housing by leading them to believe that they will face discrimination, and that they lead to misunderstanding among the public at large concerning the permissibility of housing discrimination. These factors would have an impact upon the work of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Fair Housing Council. Metro. Milwaukee Fair Hous. Council v. Goetsch (LIRC, 12/06/91).

The Wisconsin Open Housing Act does not extend to complaints of discriminatory conduct between roommates in the same apartment. Hoffman v. Warner (LIRC, 05/05/88).

An owner of residential property is responsible for the discriminatory actions of the manager, caretaker, or employee where the action is within the subordinate's apparent authority, whether or not the owner has knowledge of the conduct. However, the employee is not responsible for the discriminatory actions of the owner. McWilson v. Rieger (Milwaukee Co. Cir. Ct., 1984).

There is discrimination where race is only a partial motivation for a defendant's actions. Beardon v. Bankier (Milwaukee Co. Cir. Ct., 12/01/83); McWilson v. Rieger (Milwaukee Co. Cir. Ct., 1984).

A white couple who sought to sublet their apartment have standing to sue the apartment owner who they allege was refusing permission to qualified subletters based on their race. Corrao v. James (Milwaukee Co. Cir. Ct., 09/30/82).