In Fond du Lac County v. Paul Meixensperger (2019AP002195), the Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled that Meixensperger had sufficient notice even though the complaint did not specify nonpayment of rent as a specific basis for eviction because he learned of it in the case and had opportunity to brief it. 

Facts

Meixensperger rented an airplane hanger from Fond du Lac County. He failed to pay rent and the county filed suit to evict him. Prior to the start of trial, during argument on motions, counsel for Meixensperger acknowledged that Meixensperger had not paid the annual lump-sum rent for the year 2019, as required by the lease agreement. Based upon this, the county moved for judgment and the trial court ruled in the county’s favor. 

Decision

On appeal, Meixensperger raised procedural issues, primarily that the complaint did not identify nonpayment of rent as a specific basis for eviction and that the county did not file a written motion seeking judgment on this basis in advance of trial. The county responded that any potential errors were harmless, pointing out that if Meixensperger was unduly surprised by the motion on the day of the scheduled court trial, that surprise was remedied when the court afforded the parties a full opportunity to address the issues upon Meixensperger’s motion for reconsideration.

The Court of Appeals agreed and upheld the decision.