Wisconsin Supreme Court Decision on Koble v. Marquardt Is a Victory for Residents, Owners, Managers, Communities, and Neighborhoods

By Rick Van Der Leest, President — Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin | Fox Valley Apartment Association

June 5, 2026

Note: What follows is a reader’s digest summary of the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in Koble Investments v. Marquardt, issued today, June 5, 2026. It should not be construed as legal advice. If you are involved in any matter related to this case or the issues it raises, please seek qualified legal counsel.

Before we get into what the Court actually decided, I want to address something that I suspect will be misrepresented widely in the hours and days ahead.

This decision will be framed in some corners of the media as a “win for landlords.” That framing is not just incomplete — it is actively harmful, and it reflects one of the central challenges we face in trying to build a rental housing ecosystem that genuinely works for everyone. The real headline here is this: the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in Koble v. Marquardt is a victory for residents, owners, managers, communities, and neighborhoods. Full stop.

Here is why that framing matters. The unintended consequences and collateral damage that have accumulated across Wisconsin’s rental housing market since the Court of Appeals issued its now-reversed decision two years ago represent a story that has largely gone untold. The negative impact on affordable housing supply — and on the rents that residents pay — can be directly traced to this case and to the well over 80 copycat lawsuits it spawned across the state. Anyone who has ever worked with attorneys on complex litigation understands that legal defense is extraordinarily expensive. Those costs — running into the millions of dollars across all the cases filed — do not disappear. In a business where rent is the primary and often only source of income, those costs get recovered through rent increases. As I have said in our “State of the Industry” presentations: we are not a manufacturing company that can add a new production line, find efficiencies, and reduce costs. Our product is housing. Our revenue is rent. When we absorb massive, unanticipated legal exposure, residents ultimately absorb it too.

That is the story that deserves to be told alongside today’s decision. And that is why I refuse to let this be framed as a landlord victory and nothing more.

What the Court Actually Decided

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals in a strong, clean ruling — and the decision was robust across the issues that mattered most to our industry.

On the Wisconsin Consumer Act: The Court ruled squarely — effectively 6-1 on the merits — that the Wisconsin Consumer Act (WCA) does not apply to residential leases under which rent is payable monthly. The core legal reasoning is straightforward: rent is a contemporaneous exchange. One month’s payment buys one month’s occupancy. There is no “agreement to defer payment” as the WCA requires. The Court leaned directly on the argument our coalition made in our amicus brief — that Wisconsin law already prevents rent acceleration and limits prepaid rent, which is structurally incompatible with the installment-debt theory the Court of Appeals had accepted. The Court also noted that in the fifty-plus years since the WCA was enacted, no court had ever applied it to a residential lease. That half-century of consistent practice is not an accident. It is the law working as it was designed to work.

On damages and causation: Even setting aside the WCA question, the Court held that tenant Elicia Marquardt suffered no recoverable pecuniary loss — because she received housing in exchange for her rent payments. A voided lease creates a periodic tenancy by operation of Wisconsin law; the tenant still owes rent for the occupancy she received. The notion that a landlord could owe every dollar of rent back — with no credit for the housing actually provided — based on a technical lease deficiency that caused the tenant no actual harm, has been soundly and thoroughly rejected.

On the lease-void question: The Court chose not to formally resolve whether Koble’s specific lease was void under § 704.44(10). It did not need to — because the causation ruling makes that question practically moot. Even if a lease were voided, no recoverable damages exist under the framework the Court has now established. The economic engine driving the 80-plus copycat cases has been shut off.

On Attorney Miller: Attorney Miller — who withdrew from representing his client and then pursued this appeal on his own behalf to recover attorney fees — loses on every count. No WCA claim, no damages, no fees. Justice Crawford’s separate concurrence would have gone further and dismissed the entire appeal on standing grounds, noting that Marquardt herself never appealed, had stopped communicating with her attorney, and had effectively walked away from the case after the eviction action was dismissed. If you attended or reviewed the September 9, 2025 oral arguments, Justice Crawford’s line of questioning to Attorney Miller made this conclusion look likely from the opening moments.

Justice Bradley’s Concurrence — What It Means and What to Keep in Mind

Justice Bradley, joined by Justice Ziegler, wrote separately to argue that the majority did not go far enough. In their view, the entire Wisconsin Consumer Act should have been declared inapplicable to residential leases — not just the single provision at the center of this case. Their reasoning: a residential tenant does not “acquire” real property in the sense the WCA’s definition of “customer” requires. Tenants get a right of possession, not ownership. Therefore, tenants are not “customers” under the WCA, and the WCA simply does not apply.

This is exactly the argument our coalition’s amicus brief made. Having two justices on record for the broader proposition is meaningful — and it signals where the Court might land if this question resurfaces in future litigation.

I do want to offer one note of context, however: Justices Bradley and Ziegler are not seeking re-election. The alignment that produced this concurrence may not be replicated on a future Court. That does not diminish what they wrote, or its persuasive force — but it is worth keeping in mind when assessing how much weight to place on that broader signal going forward.

What This Means Practically

The immediate practical impact is significant. The core legal theory driving the wave of litigation against Wisconsin housing providers — that landlords are “debt collectors” subject to WCA double-damages penalties for enforcing residential leases — is dead. The damages-without-causation theory is dead. The fee-shifting strategy that made these cases financially attractive to plaintiff’s attorneys is dead. The group of attorneys who pursued this class-action windfall theory will, in all likelihood, move on to their next target.

The § 704.44(10) lease-void question technically remains open, but it has been defanged. Without a viable damages theory, the economic incentive to litigate it is gone.

There is also a legislative angle worth watching. Governor Evers vetoed Assembly Bill 202 in March 2026 — a carefully crafted bill that our coalition helped draft and actively championed, and that would have, among other things, addressed the void-vs-voidable question the Court left open today. His stated rationale was to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision. That rationale is now exhausted. The Court has spoken. If the void-vs-voidable question warrants a statutory fix — and there is a reasonable argument that it does — the path back to the Legislature is open, and the Governor no longer has a principled basis for delay.

A Final Word

AANW FVAA — have been engaged in this fight since the Court of Appeals issued its decision two years ago. We tracked and documented every Koble-like case filed across the state. We helped draft and advocate for AB 202. We contributed to the coalition amicus brief filed before the Supreme Court. We testified, we communicated, and we pushed — not just because this affected housing providers, but because we understood from the beginning that what happens to housing providers ultimately happens to the residents who depend on the housing they provide.

Today’s decision is good news. Not just for owners and managers. For the residents who benefit from a stable, financially viable housing market. For the communities that depend on that supply. And for the neighborhoods where quality rental housing makes a real difference in people’s lives. A sustainable rental housing marketplace requires that all stakeholders succeed — and today, the Court helped make that more possible.

This outcome belongs to everyone who stayed engaged — every member who followed along, every provider who shared their story, and every organization that stood with our coalition. The work is not finished, but today the legal ground and financial footings beneath Wisconsin’s rental housing marketplace are more stable than they were yesterday.

Click in the link below to be taken to STR activity that is going on out West.

Idaho state lawmakers moved to force local governments to loosen their regulatory grip on short-term rentals after years of debate...

We saw this issue come up in Green Bay late last year and earlier this year.  This particular issue will not go away, anywhere, in any state.  AANW FVAA meets at least once monthly, if not twice a month with a dedicated team of housing association professionals, and rental property related groups across the United States, to discuss and explore the challenges we all face, including our residents, as look ahead to 2026 and beyond.

If you are not currently a member, please consider becoming a member and begin to get engaged at a point in time when that stakes could not be more significant.  If you are already a member, we thank you for your membership and your support, but you can also help by recruiting someone you know that is "in the business", but does not belong to AANW FVAA.

Thank you,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc.

Fox Valley Apartment Association, Inc.

The decision stems from a 2022 lawsuit brought by Attorney General Letitia James against Ithaca Renting Company for refusing to participate in the federal program.  Source of Income discussions are very prevalent across nearly every state in the US. 

• Read a news article by clicking on the link below...

Appellate Court Finds Law Unconstitutional that Protects Section 8 Housing Voucher Users

• Additional Source Related to the Specifics of this Case Can Be Found Here:

Matter of People of the State of N.Y. v Commons West, LLC

Kind regards,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc.

Fox Valley Apartment Association, Inc.

Feb. 27, 2026

MILWAUKEE — The Badger Institute applauded Gov. Tony Evers and Republican legislators for passage of a crucial housing bill that will increase supply and bring down cost while still allowing municipalities to control whether they want to grow.

Please click on the link below to read the full article...

Badger Institute applauds Evers and Republican legislators for housing bill

Best Regards,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc.

Fox Valley Apartment Association, Inc.

Article from Urban Milwaukee:

Press Release, Feb. 13th

Rep. Ryan Clancy Announces Tenant Protections Including Right to Counsel During Evictions

...Bill package also creates new discrimination protections, other evictions reforms

Madison, WI – Today, Rep Ryan Clancy (D-19) released his 2025-26 Tenant Protection Package, bills written to provide new, critical protections for Wisconsin renters in an increasingly unstable economy. Several of the bills provide new powerful protections for people facing evictions, including establishing a statewide Right to Counsel (LRB-1214).

Other bills in the package authored by Rep. Clancy include:

• LRB-4229 – Tenants’ right to organize, protecting tenants’ right to self-organization without retaliation
• LRB-0358 – Automatic record cleanup, providing protections for tenants who defeat eviction actions
• LRB-0362 – Extending the cure periods for termination with cause
• LRB-0363 – Disposition of property in evictions, preventing landlords from seizing tenants’ personal property during evictions
• LRB-0511 – Allowing small claims to hear illegal lockout cases
• LRB-0438 – Repeal prohibition on certain waivers re private promises not to evict
• LRB-0439 – Procedural safeguards before judgment is entered in a small claims eviction
• LRB-0391 – Recognizing discrimination as defense to eviction

Please find a bill explainer here — it will be updated with assembly bill numbers as they are assigned!

Rep. Ryan Clancy released the following statement:

“Right now, landlords and developers have plenty of allies in Wisconsin’s legislature – unfortunately, that’s led to very few protections for renters while rents are spiraling out-of-control around Wisconsin.

That’s why we’re introducing this package of tenant protection bills, including a statewide right to counsel for people facing eviction in Wisconsin. Right to Counsel has been wildly successful in Milwaukee County. It’s kept hundreds of people in their homes since I authored and passed it in 2021– it should be in place statewide along with other critical protections in this package.

People who rent their homes in Wisconsin deserve fair treatment and dignity every bit as much as homeowners. Right now, though, they’re often subject to terrible living conditions, unfair eviction actions, discrimination, and other inexcusable treatment from landlords and their agents. In places like Minnesota, under siege by the federal government, many are facing evictions because they’re unable to leave their homes to work. We can and should act now to prevent similar tragedies in Wisconsin.

Our communities need quality, public and social housing, resources enjoyed in countries with far less wealth than the United States. As we pursue that, this tenant protection package is a necessary investment in housing justice and equity. I’m proud to continue leading on making these bills into law.”

NOTE: This press release was submitted to Urban Milwaukee and was not written by an Urban Milwaukee writer. While it is believed to be reliable, Urban Milwaukee does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.

We saw a similar Tenant Protection Package of Bills like this come out in October of 2023, leading up to the 2024 election year.  And of course, 2026 is an election year once again.

Many proposed ideas would exacerbate the current supply vs. demand issues in housing. All of this will only serve to make housing affordability and availability worse. These concepts have been tried and failed in other states and even in foreign countries, often hurting residents, owners, and managers alike.  

However, we pledge to work with our legislators, across both sides of the aisle, including as well the various housing advocacy groups, to see where we have common ground, and explore collectively where we can come up with proposals that address the root causes of some of what is causing bills such as these to be proposed in the first place.

In order for affordable housing to be available "and" sustainable...owners must be allowed to be successful, and our residents need to have a clean and stable housing environment.  A sustainable rental housing marketplace needs both owners and residents to be successful...WE MUST work on these challenges together.

Best Regards,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc.

Fox Valley Apartment Association, Inc.

National Apartment Association Article:

HUD, USDA Revoke 30-Day Notice Rules

Learn more about what this means for industry operators.

By Ben Harrold | February 25, 2026 | Updated February 26, 2026

4 minute read

Update (2/26/2026): Shortly after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s release of their interim rule revoking their 30-day notice requirement, the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued a similar rule under their jurisdiction. The following article has been updated to reflect the USDA’s rule.

HUD Announces Rule 

On February 25, 2026, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released its unpublished interim final rule ending the requirement to provide a 30-day notice before termination of lease in project-based rental assistance (PBRA) properties and for public housing agencies (PHAs). This rule will become effective 30 days after the date it is published in the Federal Register, currently slated for February 26, 2026.

In finalizing this rule, HUD is revoking its 2021 interim final rule and 2024 final rule that require PHAs and owners of PBRA housing to provide a 30-day notice before termination of lease for nonpayment of rent in covered housing. Notice requirements will return to pre-2021 rule notice requirements, which include timelines for certain HUD-assisted housing programs. 

In the rule, HUD explains that the 30-day notice requirement laid out in its 2021 interim final rule was intended to allow time for eligible residents to access Emergency Rental Assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2024 final rule expanded this requirement beyond national emergencies and specified that affected programs included Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance, Section 202/162 Project Assistance Contract (PAC), Section 202 Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC), Section 811 PRAC, Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program (811 PRA) and Senior Preservation Rental Assistance Contract Projects (SPRAC). 

This rule removes provisions requiring PHAs and PBRA owners to include certain information in their notice to tenants of lease termination for nonpayment and language that prohibited PHAs and PBRA owners from providing tenants with a notice of termination prior to the day after the rent is due according to the lease. Importantly, this interim final rule eliminates the HUD Secretary’s discretion to prescribe information that must be included in notices to tenants in the event of a Presidentially declared national emergency.

In response to the announcement, NAA President & CEO Bob Pinnegar shared in a HUD press release that “for more than five years now, federal intrusion into the highly localized eviction process has only exacerbated myriad housing challenges in communities nationwide—particularly as affordability remains one of the defining issues of our time. Today’s announcement by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is an important step in restoring normalcy and balance to housing operations, replacing a misguided federal 30-day notice requirement for federally backed housing with streamlined, simplified, and consistent guidance. The National Apartment Association (NAA) applauds Secretary Turner for his steadfast leadership and looks forward to our continued work together on our shared goals of boosting housing supply, lowering costs, and easing affordability challenges long-term." 

USDA RHS Follows Suit

Announced only a few hours after HUD’s rule, the Rural Housing Service (RHS) -- an agency of the Rural Development (RD) mission area within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) -- issued a final rule rescinding its requirement to provide at minimum 30 days’ notice before the start of eviction proceedings due to nonpayment of rent in RHS Section 515 and 514 Multi-Family Housing (MFH) properties.  

This rule also eliminates the requirement for multifamily borrowers to provide federal rental assistance information during a Presidentially declared national emergency. This rule’s revocation of prior rulemaking becomes effective immediately. In the rule, USDA RHS notes that “longstanding guidelines and regulations in Section 515 and Section 514 MFH tenant recertification process, which predate the 30-Day Notice Final Rule and the CARES Act, protect [tenants in covered housing] from being evicted less than 30 days from receiving notice of non-payment.”

Industry Impact 

The National Apartment Association (NAA) is grateful to HUD and USDA for taking swift action to eliminate these outdated policies and for their unwavering commitment to reducing regulatory barriers to providing rental housing and increasing supply. These are decisive victories for the industry’s CARES Act advocacy. These announcements are an important step in the right direction to eliminate federal enforcement of the CARES Act notice; however it is important to note that enforcement of the CARES Act 30-day notice for covered housing is still a matter of legal controversy. NAA members should consult with their local counsel if they have operational questions regarding their internal practices as a result of the agencies’ actions. 

NAA will continue its advocacy with Congress and the Trump Administration to ensure the rental housing industry’s voice is heard. The Respect State Housing Laws Act, the industry’s CARES Act fix, must pass to return rightful authority of the landlord-tenant relationship to the states and restore normalcy to rental housing operations. States’ (or localities’) established notice procedure should apply uniformly to all rent-related disputes.  

Please stay tuned as AANW FVAA continue to gain even more clarity around this important Interim Rules Revocation.  As always, please consult with your own attorney regarding specific legal questions you may have relative to your own circumstances/rental properties.

Here are the two documents referred to above:

• HUD: Revocation of the 30-Day Notification Requirement Prior To Termination of Lease for Non-Payment of Rent.pdf
• USDA: Dept of Agriculture - Rescinding 30 Day Notification Requirements Related to Eviction Based Nonpayment of Rent in Multifamily Housing Direct Properties.pdf 

Kind Regards,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin

Fox Valley Apartment Association

Dear Members,

When the Federal Trade Commission first raised concerns about “Unfair or Deceptive Fees” in 2024, AANW FVAA was the first, and perhaps the only housing association in the state of Wisconsin to take immediate and proactive action. We submitted a detailed position statement to ensure that policymakers understood the realities and complexities of fee structures within the rental housing industry. We did this because if we are not advocating for our members and the broader rental housing community—who will.

Our letter emphasized that transparency is essential, but so is accuracy. While housing providers should disclose all known fees associated with a rental, not all fees are “junk” or deceptive. Many relate to optional amenities—such as fitness centers, garages, or shared community spaces—that enhance residents’ quality of life. Our goal was to ensure that the FTC recognized these distinctions before shaping national policy.

This type of advocacy defines AANW FVAA. We don’t just react to proposed rules; we participate in shaping them. Our commitment extends to every level of government, working on behalf of our members, the industry, and the residents we all serve. When housing policies are crafted without considering real-world impacts, the unintended consequences often fall on the very residents, neighborhoods and communities they aim to help.

That’s why advocacy, community engagement, and education are at the heart of our mission. We encourage members who belong to any housing association to know where their dues go and to see the tangible results of that collective investment. AANW FVAA stand at the intersection of policymaking and practical/common-sense housing operation, ensuring both are grounded in fairness and informed understanding.

For more insight into this FTC discussion, we encourage you to read the FTC Press Release here... 

FTC Submits Draft ANPRM Related to Rental Housing Fees...

We will continue to stay engaged with the FTC as they seek even more public comment regarding this key housing policy within our industry.

Stay informed,

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin

Fox Valley Apartment Association

Public Service Announcement:

Please see the attachment PDF below regarding the merger of Legal Action of Wisconsin and Judicare Legal Aid, effective January 1, 2026.  Also the article in the link below the PDF further discusses this merger:

• Legal Action - Judicare Merger.pdf

• Link to Article in Urban Milwaukee Below:

Legal Action & Judicare Merger

While some in our industry might not see this necessarily as a positive development, we perhaps have a different point of view.

We have long been working to promote a more collaborative approach, and at times "outside the box thinking" in solving our housing challenges across the State.  This development may give us a chance to develop these relationships from within a more unified leadership and advocacy point of view.

We look forward to fostering even more collaborative discussions with all of our housing community partners, that embraces a common sense/root cause analysis approach to solving some of our most challenging housing issues.

Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin

Fox Valley Apartment Association

"Republicans want lower property taxes and less regulation.  Democrats emphasize funding affordable housing development programs and renter rights.  Both want to incentivize developers to build cheaper options."

AANW and FVAA members were introduced in 2024 to the “State of the Industry” presentation series, which explored housing affordability challenges from the perspectives of rental property owners, managers, and residents.  We also hosted a “Meet the Candidates” event last year in September to hear candidates’ positions on rental housing and the affordability challenges we all face.

Earlier this year, that body of work was re-branded and formed the foundation for much of the original content used in the Attendee and Legislator folders that were part of the Rental Housing Coalition (RHC) Capitol Day in March.  As founding members of the RHC, we recognize the need to work collaboratively with the many rental housing associations across the state.

As we slowly turn our attention to the 2026 Mid-Term Elections, we have been discussing the many different policy debates that will be shaped over the months leading to these elections. 

This article by Wisconsin Watch lays out some of this as we look towards navigating, in some cases familiar waters, but yet in many other cases uncharted territory.  Click on the link below to be taken to this article:

Wisconsin Faces a Housing Affordability Crisis...

Please look for other blog posts and email communications about the advocacy work being done at the Federal level, and of course the State/Local levels as it relates to Koble and other housing related policy discussions.

Posted on behalf of:

Rick Van Der Leest

President
Apartment Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc.
Fox Valley Apartment Association, Inc.

July 15th, 2025

Rentometer has published its latest Single-Family Rentals Report, covering the first six months of the year and highlighting rent prices and trends across the U.S.

The report focuses on median rents for 3-bedroom single-family homes in over 1,100 cities nationwide. Single-family home rentals house 41% of the U.S. renter population, and three-bedroom single-family homes are a preferred option for many families and investors.

As of this release, Rentometer has updated its methodology to report median values rather than averages, offering a better snapshot of the market. Our data set includes over 10 million new rental records annually, based on advertised asking rents, which serve as the foundation for our market reports.

Key Takeaways

• Rent Growth Picks Up Again But Remains Below the Inflation Rate and Average Wage Growth: Median single-family rents rose to $2,135, an increase of $36 or 1.7% compared to the same period last year.
• Midwest and Northeast Rents Grew the Fastest: Rents in the Midwest increased the most (+6.1%), followed by the Northeast (+4.6%) and the Pacific region (+3.1%). Median rents in the Rocky Mountain region rose by 1.1%, while rents in the Southwest remained flat.
• Vacancies Hit Record Highs: Vacancy rates for single-family homes continued their upward trend in 2025, reaching 6.3% in the first quarter, the highest level since 2016.
• Boston, MA saw the highest annual rent growth among large cities, with 3-bedroom single-family rents averaging $4,500—up 12.5% year-over-year. The increase was partly due to larger homes listed and a low rental inventory, making the data more sensitive to fluctuations. Staten Island, NY (+9.4%) and Long Beach, CA (+9.0%) followed.
• Several large U.S. cities saw rents decline. Fort Wayne, IN recorded the largest year-over-year drop among cities with populations of 250,000 or more, with rents down 6.4%, followed by Dallas, TX (-6.3%) and Santa Ana, CA (-5.0%).
• Income Needed to Rent a 3-Bedroom Single-Family Home Tops $200,000 in Some Coastal Markets: Single-family rents have risen 39.5% over the past five years, compared to a 23% increase in median household income. As a result, the income needed to rent a typical SFR has surged—reaching nearly $200,000 in high-cost coastal markets like San Francisco.

Midwest Leads Rent Growth Rebound, But National Gains Still Trail Inflation

In the first half of 2025, median asking rents for single-family homes rose 1.7% year-over-year, reaching $2,135. While this marks a one percentage point increase over the 0.7% growth recorded in the first half of 2024, it still lags behind both the national inflation rate and average wage growth—indicating a slight decline in real rental income for investors and improved affordability for renters. Rent growth also remains well below the elevated levels observed during the first two post-pandemic years—and even below the typical 2–4% historical growth range—suggesting continued softness in the market and slower-than-usual gains for investors.

Regionally, the Midwest—the most affordable area for single-family renters—has seen a strong rebound. Median rent growth surged to 6.1% year-over-year, up from 3.4% last year, matching the pace seen two years ago and leading all U.S. regions...

Click on the PDF link below to read the full report...

Rentometer Mid-Year Report 2025 - National Trends in Single-Family Rental Markets - July 15th, 2025.pdf

Admin Support - AANW & FVAA