Mueller v. TL90108, LLC
2018 WI App 52
Wis. Ct. App.2018Background
- In 2001 Roy Leiske’s 1938 Talbot Lago was stolen from his Milwaukee warehouse; police found forged documents showing it was shipped abroad. Leiske later died; Mueller inherited the car and sold part interest to Ford.
- In 2016 TL90108, LLC purchased the car via international brokers and applied for Illinois title; the application hit a stolen-car database and MPD placed a hold. The car was stored in Massachusetts.
- Plaintiffs demanded return of the car from TL; TL refused. Plaintiffs filed suit in 2017 seeking replevin and declaratory judgment to recover possession and clarify title.
- The trial court dismissed, holding the six-year statute of repose (WIS. STAT. § 893.35) began to run at the 2001 theft (conversion), so the claim was time-barred.
- The court of appeals reversed, holding the accrual date for a wrongful-detention claim is when the wrongful detention begins (here, when TL refused to return the car), and plaintiffs filed within six years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does a claim to recover personal property accrue under § 893.35: at the original theft/conversion or when a subsequent wrongful detention begins? | Accrues when TL’s wrongful detention began (when TL refused to return the car after demand). | Accrues at the time of the 2001 conversion; wrongful detention means only initial lawful possession that becomes unlawful. | Accrues when the wrongful detention begins; a wrongful detention is a separate accrual event from conversion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Voight v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 80 Wis.2d 376 (1977) (cause of action arises from defendant’s wrongful act)
- Capitol Sand & Gravel Co. v. Waffenschmidt, 71 Wis.2d 227 (1976) (replevin requires proof property was wrongfully detained when action commenced)
- Durham v. Pekrul, 104 Wis.2d 339 (1981) (replevin/damages where owner’s items left for repair were not returned)
- Castellani v. Bailey, 218 Wis.2d 245 (1998) (legislature’s accrual rule precludes discovery rule for repose statutes)
- Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane Cty., 271 Wis.2d 633 (2004) (statutory interpretation principles)
- Pawlowski v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 322 Wis.2d 21 (2009) (separate statutory words receive separate meanings)
- Gross v. Hoffman, 227 Wis. 296 (1938) (only dispositive issues need be addressed)
- Ford Motor Co. v. Lyons, 137 Wis.2d 397 (1987) (replevin is a possessory action)