Wisconsin Bar Exam Distinctions

WISCONSIN BAR EXAM DISTINCTIONS

Wisconsin occupies a singular place among American jurisdictions. It is the only state where a substantial share of new lawyers are admitted without ever sitting for a bar examination, through the diploma privilege—graduates of the University of Wisconsin and Marquette law schools who complete the required curriculum are admitted with no bar exam at all. For everyone else, Wisconsin is adopting the Uniform Bar Examination, with its first UBE administration scheduled for July 2026; from that point those who sit the exam take the UBE and earn a portable score. Wisconsin is also one of only nine community-property jurisdictions, having adopted the Uniform Marital Property Act in 1986, which made Wisconsin a community-property state in everything but name. Together with its own statutory rules of evidence, a modified-comparative-negligence regime, a notice recording act, and idiosyncratic probate and homestead protections, these features diverge sharply from the common-law, separate-property assumptions baked into the national MBE and MEE materials.

📘 This page covers only where Wisconsin law departs from the national MBE/MEE doctrine. For the universal law, see the MBE Subject Outlines and MEE Subject Outlines.

I. EXAM FORMAT, SCORING, AND THE DIPLOMA PRIVILEGE

A. Wisconsin Is Adopting the UBE (First Administration July 2026)

Per the NCBE, Wisconsin is adopting the Uniform Bar Examination, with its first UBE administration scheduled for July 2026. From that administration, applicants who must sit for the bar take the standard UBE — the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), the Multistate Essay Examination (MEE), and the Multistate Performance Test (MPT) — which produces a portable score. (The exception, below, is the diploma privilege, under which UW and Marquette graduates take no exam at all.)

WI Rule: National/UBE: most states administer the UBE and produce a portable score. Wisconsin: joining them effective July 2026, so a qualifying UBE score earned in Wisconsin can be transferred to other UBE jurisdictions, and a qualifying UBE score earned elsewhere can be transferred into Wisconsin (subject to each jurisdiction's minimum and transfer window). The MEE and MPT are NCBE-drafted and graded against general/majority law, so the Wisconsin distinctions catalogued on this page matter chiefly for practice and for any state-named question.

B. Scoring

WI Rule: Under the UBE, the MBE (50%), MEE (30%), and MPT (20%) scaled scores are combined into one portable figure, and an applicant passes by reaching Wisconsin's required minimum (confirm the current cut score with the Wisconsin Board of Bar Examiners). (Note: the "modified 51%" reference in these materials concerns Wisconsin's comparative-negligence threshold in Section VIII, not the passing score.)

C. The Diploma Privilege — Wisconsin's Signature Distinction

WI Rule: Under Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 40.03, a graduate of one of the two ABA-accredited law schools located in Wisconsin — the University of Wisconsin Law School and Marquette University Law School — may be admitted without taking any bar examination at all. This is the "diploma privilege." The graduate must have completed the required Wisconsin-law coursework (minimum credit hours across designated subject areas) and satisfy character-and-fitness review, but the examination itself is waived.

National: every other state requires every applicant — including in-state graduates — to pass a bar examination (or transfer a qualifying UBE score). Wisconsin: in-state-school graduates take no exam. Out-of-state and foreign-educated applicants must sit for the bar exam (the UBE as of the July 2026 administration) or qualify by admission on motion. The privilege survived a dormant-Commerce-Clause challenge in Wiesmueller v. Kosobucki.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: If a distinctions or professional-responsibility prompt asks about admission, name the two qualifying schools (UW and Marquette), state that the privilege waives the examination but not character-and-fitness review, and note it is unavailable to out-of-state graduates. Do not overstate it — the privilege is narrow and school-specific.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Applicants who actually sit for the exam are disproportionately out-of-state graduates, who tend to have the least exposure to Wisconsin's two great departures — the Marital Property Act and the state evidence code. On the UBE you are graded on general/majority law unless a question names Wisconsin, but these doctrines matter for Wisconsin practice and any state-named question, so budget study time accordingly.

II. CIVIL PROCEDURE — WISCONSIN STATE PRACTICE

A. Statutes of Limitation

WI Rule: Wisconsin's limitations periods (Chapter 893) depart from generic assumptions. Personal-injury negligence: 3 years; injury to property and contract actions (written or oral): generally 6 years; most intentional torts: 3 years. Medical malpractice runs 3 years from the act or 1 year from discovery, subject to a statute of repose. A borrowing statute (§ 893.07) applies the shorter of the foreign and Wisconsin periods to claims arising elsewhere.

National: apply whatever period the question supplies. Wisconsin: expect the 3-year tort / 6-year contract framework.

B. Pleading and Procedure

WI Rule: Wisconsin is a notice-pleading state under Chapter 802, modeled on the Federal Rules but with its own numbering. Personal jurisdiction is governed by the long-arm statute § 801.05, a detailed enumerated statute (not a "limits of due process" provision), so analysis is two-step: first whether a subsection is satisfied, then whether minimum-contacts due process is met.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: If a Wisconsin civil-procedure essay raises personal jurisdiction, do not jump straight to International Shoe. State first that Wisconsin requires the plaintiff to fit the defendant within an enumerated subsection of § 801.05, and only then turn to the constitutional minimum-contacts analysis. The two-step structure is itself the point being tested.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Memorize the core limitations periods as a small table — 3 years for personal-injury tort, 6 years for contract and property damage — because they recur across torts, contracts, and property essays, not just civil procedure.

III. EVIDENCE — THE WISCONSIN RULES OF EVIDENCE

A. A Separate, Statutory Code

WI Rule: Wisconsin has its own codified evidence law in Chapters 904–911. It is patterned on the Federal Rules and substantially parallel, so the MBE-tested federal framework is the right starting point, but Wisconsin retains several departures and the numbering differs (relevance in Chapter 904, hearsay in Chapter 908).

B. Key Departures From the FRE

WI Rule: Several distinctions recur. First, Wisconsin recognizes a broader set of privileges by statute, including a physician-patient privilege (§ 905.04) with no general federal counterpart. Second, its treatment of the residual and certain hearsay exceptions has historically differed in detail. Third, on expert testimony Wisconsin formerly used a relevancy/qualification standard, but the legislature amended § 907.02 in 2011 to adopt the Daubert reliability standard. Daubert now governs.

National (FRE): no general physician-patient privilege; Daubert governs expert reliability. Wisconsin: statutory physician-patient privilege exists; Daubert now governs expert testimony after the 2011 amendment to § 907.02.

EXAMPLE: A Wisconsin personal-injury plaintiff seeks to bar the treating physician from testifying about confidential treatment statements. Under the FRE there is no privilege. Under § 905.04 the physician-patient privilege may apply — but a patient who places his physical condition at issue (as a personal-injury plaintiff does) waives it as to that condition. The tested skill is recognizing the privilege exists, then applying the patient-litigant waiver.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: When you spot a confidential medical communication in a Wisconsin evidence essay, flag the § 905.04 physician-patient privilege even if you conclude it is waived. Graders reward the applicant who knows Wisconsin recognizes a privilege the FRE does not, then correctly applies the patient-litigant exception.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Treat the FRE as your default and learn the short list of Wisconsin departures — physician-patient privilege, the post-2011 Daubert adoption, and the different statute numbering. That short list is where the points are.

IV. MARITAL PROPERTY — THE UNIFORM MARITAL PROPERTY ACT (WISCONSIN AS A COMMUNITY-PROPERTY STATE)

A. Wisconsin Is a Community-Property State in Substance

This is the most heavily tested and most counterintuitive area of Wisconsin distinctions. In 1984 Wisconsin enacted the Uniform Marital Property Act (UMPA), effective January 1, 1986, codified in Chapter 766. UMPA bottled community-property principles in a form palatable to common-law states; Wisconsin is the only state to adopt it. The result is that Wisconsin is, in legal substance, a community-property jurisdiction, even though the statute says "marital property" rather than "community property."

WI Rule: National (common-law / separate-property states): property acquired during marriage belongs to the spouse who earned or acquired it; the other spouse has no present ownership interest, only a contingent claim to equitable distribution at divorce or an elective share at death. Wisconsin: under UMPA, each spouse owns a present, undivided one-half interest in all marital property, regardless of which spouse earned it or holds title. This is the defining feature of community property and the central thing the bar tests.

B. The Classification Scheme — Marital vs. Individual Property

WI Rule: UMPA divides all property held by spouses into two classes:

Marital property (the community): Wisconsin applies a strong presumption that all property of spouses is marital property (§ 766.31). Income earned by either spouse during marriage is marital. Critically, income earned during marriage from individual (separate) property is itself marital property unless reclassified by a marital property agreement — a hallmark rule that surprises applicants trained on equitable-distribution states.

Individual property (separate): property is individual if (1) owned before the determination date (the marriage, 1/1/1986, or establishing Wisconsin domicile, whichever is later); (2) acquired during marriage by gift or inheritance from a third party; (3) acquired in exchange for individual property; (4) appreciation of individual property (subject to the income rule); or (5) classified as individual by a valid agreement.

EXAMPLE: H owns a rental duplex before marriage; it stays his individual property. During marriage it generates $20,000 in rent. National (separate-property state): the rent follows the asset and stays H's separate property. Wisconsin: the rent earned during marriage is marital property in which W owns an undivided one-half interest, absent a reclassifying agreement. The duplex is individual, but its income is community.

C. Mixing, Tracing, and Reclassification

WI Rule: When marital and individual property are commingled so the classes cannot be traced, the entire mixed asset is reclassified as marital property (§ 766.63), and the spouse asserting an individual interest bears the tracing burden. Substantial uncompensated labor or skill applied to the other spouse's individual property can also create a marital-property component.

D. Management, Control, and Creditors

WI Rule: Either spouse acting alone may generally manage marital property (§ 766.51), but gifts of marital property to third parties above a statutory amount require both spouses' consent or trigger a remedy. On the creditor side: an obligation incurred in the interest of the marriage or family may be satisfied from all marital property plus the incurring spouse's individual property; a non-marital obligation generally reaches only that spouse's individual property and marital-property interest (§ 766.55).

E. Marital Property Agreements

WI Rule: By a marital property agreement (§ 766.58) — the Wisconsin analog to a pre/postnuptial agreement within the community-property framework — spouses may reclassify property, alter management rights, and even create a "Washington will" provision passing marital property to the survivor without probate. It must be in writing, signed by both spouses, and is enforceable without consideration; courts may refuse to enforce a provision unconscionable when made or lacking disclosure or voluntariness.

F. Death and the Marital-Property Estate

WI Rule: At a spouse's death, the deceased spouse's estate consists of his or her one-half interest in each item of marital property plus all of the decedent's individual property. The survivor already owns the other one-half of the marital property by present ownership interest — it does not pass through the estate. This dovetails with the wills and elective-share rules in Section V.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: When a Wisconsin fact pattern involves spouses and property, your first move is always to classify each asset as marital or individual under § 766.31, expressly invoking the marital-property presumption and the determination date. Only after classification do you reach the substantive question (divorce division, creditor's reach, or what passes at death). State explicitly that "income earned during marriage, even from individual property, is marital property" whenever the facts give a separate asset that produced income — that single sentence is worth real points because it is the rule out-of-state applicants miss.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Do not confuse UMPA classification (which governs ownership) with divorce property division. Wisconsin divorce courts divide property under Chapter 767 with a presumption of equal division, applying even to individual property. The regimes coexist: UMPA controls ownership during marriage and at death; Chapter 767 controls division at divorce.

V. WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ESTATES

A. Will Execution and Intestacy

WI Rule: A will must be in writing, signed by the testator (or by another at the testator's direction in the testator's conscious presence), and signed by at least two witnesses (§ 853.03). Self-proving affidavits are recognized. Wisconsin does not recognize holographic (unwitnessed handwritten) wills; a handwritten will must still satisfy the two-witness requirement. A harmless-error / substantial-compliance provision permits probate of a defective document if proponents prove by clear and convincing evidence the decedent intended it as a will.

Intestacy (§ 852.01) reflects the community-property character: if all the decedent's descendants are also the surviving spouse's, the spouse takes the entire intestate estate; in a blended family (descendants not of the surviving spouse), the spouse takes the decedent's individual property and one-half of the decedent's marital-property interest, with the rest to the non-mutual descendants.

B. The Elective Share — "Deferred Marital Property"

WI Rule: Because Wisconsin is a community-property state, disinheritance protection is structured differently from the common-law elective share. Instead of a flat fraction of the estate, the survivor has an elective right to a portion of the decedent's "deferred marital property" (§ 861.02) — property that would have been marital had it been acquired under UMPA, but was acquired before the determination date or while domiciled in a non-UMPA state. The survivor may elect up to 50% of the augmented deferred marital property estate, reduced by amounts already received.

National: most common-law states give a one-third (or sliding UPC) elective share of the estate. Wisconsin: the survivor already owns half of all marital property outright, and the statutory election reaches only deferred marital property.

C. Homestead and Family Allowances

WI Rule: Wisconsin protects the surviving spouse and minor children through a homestead right (occupancy) and a family-support allowance during administration. The homestead exemption (§ 815.20) also shields a defined dollar amount of homestead equity from most creditors, operating during life (execution and bankruptcy) and at death.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: If a Wisconsin estates essay asks whether a disinherited spouse has a remedy, do not write the standard "one-third elective share" answer. Explain that the surviving spouse already owns one-half of all marital property by present interest, and then apply the deferred-marital-property election for the remainder. Getting the vocabulary right — "deferred marital property," not "elective share of the estate" — signals Wisconsin-specific mastery.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: The estates rules are downstream of UMPA. If you have internalized that the survivor owns half the marital property already, the intestacy split, the deferred-marital-property election, and the homestead protections all follow logically. Anchor everything to the present-ownership-interest principle.

VI. FAMILY LAW

A. Divorce — No-Fault and Property Division

WI Rule: Wisconsin is a pure no-fault divorce state; the sole ground is that the marriage is irretrievably broken (Chapter 767). Property division uses a presumption of equal (50/50) division, and the divisible estate includes property regardless of UMPA classification — except gifted and inherited property (and exchanges thereof), which is presumptively excluded unless excluding it would create hardship. This gift/inheritance exclusion is a frequently tested wrinkle.

B. Maintenance and Child Support

WI Rule: Spousal maintenance is awarded under a multi-factor statutory analysis (§ 767.56) with no rigid formula. Child support is set by the percentage-of-income standard promulgated by the Department of Children and Families (e.g., 17% of payer income for one child, 25% for two, and so on), a guideline approach distinct from the income-shares model used in many states.

C. Custody — "Legal Custody" and "Physical Placement"

WI Rule: Wisconsin uses its own custody vocabulary: it separates legal custody (decision-making authority, with a statutory presumption favoring joint legal custody) from physical placement (where the child resides and the time each parent spends with the child). Determinations are governed by the best-interest factors of § 767.41.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: Use Wisconsin's terms of art precisely. Write "legal custody" and "physical placement," not "custody and visitation." Note the statutory presumption of joint legal custody. The vocabulary itself is graded.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: The gift-and-inheritance exclusion from divisible property is the family-law analog of the UMPA individual-property rule. Spotting gifted or inherited assets and excluding them (absent hardship) is a reliable point-earner.

VII. REAL PROPERTY

A. Recording Act — Notice

WI Rule: Wisconsin is a notice recording jurisdiction (§ 706.08). A subsequent purchaser for value who takes without notice (actual, constructive, or inquiry) of a prior unrecorded interest prevails — even without recording first. National: split among race, notice, and race-notice. Wisconsin: notice; the BFP need only take without notice.

B. Adverse Possession

WI Rule: The general adverse-possession period is 20 years (§ 893.25); it drops to 10 years under color of title (§ 893.26) and to 7 years under color of title plus payment of taxes (§ 893.27). National: periods vary, commonly 10–21 years. Wisconsin: 20 default, reduced to 10 or 7.

C. Mortgages and Foreclosure

WI Rule: Wisconsin is a lien-theory state and foreclosures proceed judicially under Chapter 846, with a statutory redemption period whose length varies by property type and whether the lender waives a deficiency judgment (a shortened redemption applies if the lender waives the deficiency). National: many states allow nonjudicial power-of-sale foreclosure. Wisconsin: judicial, with statutory redemption.

D. Homestead Exemption in Property Context

WI Rule: The § 815.20 homestead exemption protects a statutory dollar amount of homestead equity from execution by most creditors, and a conveyance or mortgage of homestead property generally requires the signatures of both spouses to be valid (§ 706.02), reflecting both homestead policy and UMPA's marital-property concerns.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On a Wisconsin recording problem, label the act "notice" expressly and state the BFP-without-notice rule before applying it. On adverse possession, identify which of the three periods (20 / 10 / 7) applies by checking for color of title and tax payment — the facts will steer you to one.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Remember the two-signature requirement for homestead conveyances. A deed or mortgage of the marital home signed by only one spouse is voidable — a classic trap that ties real property back to UMPA and homestead law.

VIII. TORTS

A. Comparative Negligence — Modified, 51% Bar

WI Rule: Wisconsin applies modified comparative negligence under § 895.045. A plaintiff recovers only if his negligence is not greater than that of the person against whom recovery is sought; recovery is barred once the plaintiff's fault exceeds 50% (the "51% bar"). Recoverable damages are reduced by the plaintiff's fault percentage. National: jurisdictions split among pure, modified-50%, and modified-51% systems. Wisconsin: modified, 51% bar — recover if 50% or less; barred at 51%+.

EXAMPLE: A jury finds the plaintiff 50% at fault and the defendant 50% at fault on a $100,000 verdict. Wisconsin: the plaintiff is not greater than the defendant, so recovery is allowed, reduced by the plaintiff's 50% — the plaintiff recovers $50,000. If the jury instead finds the plaintiff 51% at fault, recovery is entirely barred.

B. The Wisconsin Comparison Rule (Individual Comparison)

WI Rule: A heavily tested wrinkle: in multi-defendant cases the plaintiff's negligence is compared individually against each defendant, not against the defendants in the aggregate. A plaintiff 40% at fault, with defendants at 35% and 25%, recovers from neither — the plaintiff is "greater than" each individual defendant and is barred against both, even though their combined 60% exceeds the plaintiff's. This individual-comparison rule is a frequent essay trap.

C. Joint and Several Liability

WI Rule: Wisconsin has curtailed joint and several liability by statute (§ 895.045). A defendant under 51% causally negligent is liable only for its several (proportionate) share; a defendant at 51% or more is jointly and severally liable for the plaintiff's total recoverable damages.

D. Damage Caps

WI Rule: Wisconsin caps noneconomic damages in medical-malpractice actions (§ 893.55, upheld by the Wisconsin Supreme Court) and limits damages against governmental entities (§ 893.80). There is no general cap in ordinary personal-injury cases. Punitive damages (§ 895.043) are capped at the greater of twice compensatory damages or $200,000.

E. Dram Shop / Liquor Liability

WI Rule: Under § 125.035, an alcohol provider is generally immune from civil liability for injuries caused by an intoxicated person, with a narrow exception for one who knowingly provides alcohol to a person under the legal drinking age when that is a substantial factor in causing injury. National: many states impose broad dram-shop liability for serving obviously intoxicated patrons. Wisconsin: broad immunity, liability essentially limited to serving minors.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On any Wisconsin torts question with a partly-at-fault plaintiff, state the § 895.045 "not greater than" rule in your rule paragraph, then — if there are multiple defendants — apply the individual comparison rule defendant-by-defendant. Failing to compare the plaintiff against each defendant separately is the single most common Wisconsin torts error.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: When a bar or tavern is a defendant, do not reflexively apply general dram-shop liability. Lead with § 125.035 immunity and look for the minor-patron exception. The default answer in Wisconsin is "no liability."

IX. CONTRACTS, UCC, AND THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS

A. UCC Adoption and Statute of Frauds

WI Rule: Wisconsin has adopted the UCC (Chapters 401–411), so Article 2 sales law tracks the MBE framework. The general Statute of Frauds (§ 241.02) requires a writing for one-year agreements, suretyship promises, and land sales; the UCC $500-goods threshold is at § 402.201. The doctrine is largely uniform; the chief Wisconsin points are the statutory citations and the 6-year contract limitations period.

B. Marital Property and Contract

WI Rule: A UMPA overlay: a contract by one spouse may create an obligation enforceable against marital property if incurred "in the interest of the marriage or family," and Chapter 766's credit provisions affect which assets a contract creditor may reach. Tie contract-creditor questions back to § 766.55.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: Treat Wisconsin contracts/UCC as national law plus a marital-property creditor overlay. If a married obligor appears, ask whether the obligation was "in the interest of the marriage or family," because that determines the reachable assets under Chapter 766.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Don't overthink contracts. The doctrine is national; the distinctions are the 6-year limitations period and the marital-property creditor rules. Spend your study time on UMPA and evidence instead.

X. BUSINESS ENTITIES

A. Corporations, LLCs, and Partnerships

WI Rule: Corporations are governed by Chapter 180 (Wisconsin Business Corporation Law, based on the MBCA); LLCs by Chapter 183 (substantially revised effective 2023 along RULLCA lines, modernizing management, fiduciary-duty, and operating-agreement defaults); partnerships by Chapter 178. The substantive principles — limited liability, veil-piercing, fiduciary duties, business-judgment rule — track national doctrine.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: Business-entities essays in Wisconsin are largely MBE/MEE-uniform. Cite Chapter 180 for corporations and Chapter 183 for LLCs if you can, but spend your analysis on the universal doctrines (duty of care, duty of loyalty, veil-piercing).

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: If a Wisconsin LLC question turns on default rules, remember the law was modernized under the RULLCA-based revision; older treatise statements of Chapter 183 defaults may be outdated.

XI. PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

A. Wisconsin Rules of Professional Conduct (SCR Chapter 20)

WI Rule: Wisconsin has adopted the ABA Model Rules as SCR Chapter 20, so the MPRE framework is the baseline, with a handful of departures. The confidentiality rule SCR 20:1.6 contains Wisconsin-specific exceptions, and the trust-accounting rules (SCR 20:1.15) governing IOLTA accounts are more prescriptive than the Model Rule. Admission and the diploma privilege are governed by SCR Chapter 40; discipline is administered by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR).

ESSAY WRITING TIP: Answer PR questions under the Model Rules framework but flag any Wisconsin variation you know — especially the trust-accounting specificity of SCR 20:1.15 and the confidentiality nuances of SCR 20:1.6. Reference the OLR as the disciplinary authority.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: The most reliable PR distinction to remember is the diploma privilege under SCR Chapter 40 (admission) — it connects PR to Wisconsin's signature feature and can appear in either a PR or a general-distinctions prompt.

XII. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — SELECTED NOTES

A. Substantive Variations

WI Rule: Wisconsin criminal law is codified in Chapters 939–948. It uses its own homicide grading (first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, second-degree variants, felony murder under § 940.03) rather than common-law degrees, and its self-defense / "castle doctrine" provision (§ 939.48) creates a statutory presumption of reasonableness for force against an unlawful intruder in a dwelling, vehicle, or business. OWI (operating while intoxicated) carries an escalating-penalty framework.

B. Procedure

WI Rule: Wisconsin criminal procedure (Chapters 967–973) provides its own rules on initial appearance, felony preliminary examination, and the distinctive John Doe proceeding (an investigatory mechanism). Federal constitutional criminal procedure applies, but Wisconsin's good-faith exception is set partly by statute (§ 968.073), and the state constitution's search-and-seizure provision is interpreted in parallel with the Fourth Amendment.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: For criminal essays, lead with the federal constitutional framework (which is what the MBE tests) and add Wisconsin's statutory overlays — castle-doctrine presumption, OWI escalation, John Doe proceedings — only where the facts invite them.

WISCONSIN BAR TIP: Wisconsin's statutory castle-doctrine presumption (§ 939.48) is the criminal-law distinction most likely to be rewarded; know that it presumes the reasonableness of force against an unlawful intruder in a home, vehicle, or place of business.

XIII. WISCONSIN DISTINCTIONS CHECKLIST

1. Diploma privilege: UW and Marquette graduates who complete the required curriculum are admitted without taking any bar exam (SCR 40.03); everyone else must sit for the exam.
2. Adopting the UBE: Wisconsin's first UBE administration is July 2026 — those who sit the exam take the UBE (MBE 50% / MEE 30% / MPT 20%) and earn a portable score that transfers to/from other UBE jurisdictions.
3. Community property: Wisconsin is a community-property state via the Uniform Marital Property Act (Chapter 766) — each spouse owns a present, undivided one-half interest in all marital property.
4. Marital-property presumption: all spousal property is presumed marital; income earned during marriage — even income from individual (separate) property — is marital property.
5. Commingling: untraceable mixing of marital and individual property reclassifies the whole asset as marital (§ 766.63).
6. Marital property agreements: writing signed by both spouses, no consideration required; may reclassify property and create nonprobate transfers (§ 766.58).
7. Deferred marital property election: the disinherited spouse elects up to 50% of deferred marital property — not a flat elective share of the estate (§ 861.02).
8. Wills: two witnesses required; no holographic wills; harmless-error/substantial-compliance available.
9. Evidence: own code (Chapters 904–911); statutory physician-patient privilege (§ 905.04); Daubert governs experts after the 2011 amendment to § 907.02.
10. Recording act: notice jurisdiction (§ 706.08).
11. Adverse possession: 20 years default; 10 years under color of title; 7 years under color of title plus payment of taxes.
12. Foreclosure: lien theory, judicial foreclosure, statutory redemption (Chapter 846); homestead conveyance needs both spouses' signatures.
13. Comparative negligence: modified, 51% bar ("not greater than"); plaintiff's fault compared individually against each defendant (§ 895.045).
14. Joint liability: only a defendant 51%+ at fault is jointly and severally liable.
15. Dram shop: broad immunity for alcohol providers; liability essentially limited to serving minors (§ 125.035).
16. Damage caps: medical-malpractice noneconomic cap (§ 893.55); punitive cap at greater of 2× compensatory or $200,000 (§ 895.043).
17. Limitations: 3 years personal-injury tort; 6 years contract and property damage (Chapter 893).
18. Family law: no-fault divorce; presumption of equal property division with gift/inheritance exclusion; "legal custody" vs. "physical placement"; percentage-of-income child support.
19. Professional responsibility: Model Rules as SCR Chapter 20; detailed trust-accounting (SCR 20:1.15); OLR discipline; admission under SCR Chapter 40.
20. Criminal: statutory homicide grading; castle-doctrine presumption (§ 939.48); John Doe proceedings; OWI escalation.