In a significant legal twist, a recent appellate court decision has overturned an eviction judgment, highlighting the importance of proper procedural adherence in landlord-tenant disputes. On January 8, 2026, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Joseph Greggory Mercer, reversing an earlier eviction judgment filed by Bryan John Knutson in La Crosse County Circuit Court. The case centered around Knutson’s failure to provide adequate notice as required by state law before attempting to evict Mercer.
The dispute began when Mercer rented an apartment from Knutson starting June 2024 under a written lease agreement. However, issues arose when Mercer fell behind on rent payments. On October 2, 2024, Knutson issued a “five-day notice” demanding payment of $970 in overdue rent or vacate the premises by October 5. Subsequently, on October 15, Knutson filed for eviction and sought $1,140 in unpaid rent. At the eviction hearing where both parties represented themselves without legal counsel, Mercer argued that the notice was defective as it only allowed three days instead of the statutory five days to settle the dues or leave.
Despite Mercer’s defense regarding improper notice timing under Wisconsin Statute § 704.17(2)(a), the circuit court initially sided with Knutson due to Mercer’s continued nonpayment by November 22. However, upon appeal and after retaining legal representation, Mercer contended that not only was the October notice invalid but also challenged subsequent procedural decisions by the circuit court concerning supplemental records.
The appellate court found merit in Mercer’s arguments against the eviction judgment. Judge Nashold concluded that Knutson’s issuance of successive notices effectively waived his right to rely on prior notices for eviction purposes. This decision aligned with precedents from other jurisdictions indicating that issuing a new notice acknowledges an ongoing tenancy and nullifies previous notices’ effectiveness.
Mercer further argued that even if he had vacated the property post-eviction ruling—which he did—the judgment could still negatively impact his future housing opportunities and credit history. The appellate court recognized these potential repercussions and determined that addressing such procedural missteps is crucial as they are likely to recur yet evade review due to their summary nature.
Ultimately, Mercer succeeded in having the eviction judgment reversed based on improper notice procedures while his appeal concerning record supplementation was deemed moot given its lack of practical effect following this reversal.
Representing their respective clients were attorneys retained post-initial hearings; however specific names were not disclosed within this document excerpt. Presiding over these consolidated appeals were Judges Gloria L. Doyle at circuit level and Nashold at appellate level under Case IDs 2024AP2499 and 2025AP203 respectively.
Source: 2025AP0203_Knutson_v_Mercer_Opinion_Wisconsin_Court_of_Appeals.pdf