Wis. Stat. § 5.90
This is the official text of Wis. Stat. § 5.90, part of Wisconsin’s Wisconsin Statutes — the complete compiled statutory law of Wisconsin, organized into numbered chapters by subject.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Recounts.
Official statutory text
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, recounts of votes cast on an electronic voting system shall be conducted in the manner prescribed in s. 9.01 . Except as provided in this subsection, sub. (2) , and s. 9.01 (1) (b) 8s. , if the ballots are distributed to the electors, the board of canvassers shall recount the ballots with automatic tabulating equipment. The board of canvassers shall test the automatic tabulating equipment to be used prior to the recount as provided in s. 5.84 , and then the official ballots or the record of the votes cast shall be recounted on the automatic tabulating equipment. In addition, the board of canvassers shall check the ballots for the presence or absence of the initials and other distinguishing marks, shall examine the ballots marked “Rejected”, “Defective”, “Overvoted”, and “Objected to” to determine the propriety of such labels, and shall compare the “Duplicate Overvoted Ballots” and “Duplicate Damaged Ballots” with their respective originals to determine the correctness of the duplicates. Unless a court orders a recount to be conducted by another method under sub. (2) , the board of canvassers may determine to conduct the recount of a specific election by hand and may determine to conduct the recount by hand for only certain wards or election districts. If electronic voting machines are used, the board of canvassers shall perform the recount using the permanent paper record of the votes cast by each elector, as generated by the machines.
(2) Any candidate, or any elector when for a referendum, may, by the close of business on the next business day after the last day for filing a petition for a recount under s. 9.01 , petition the circuit court for an order requiring ballots under sub. (1) to be counted by hand or by another method approved by the court. The petitioner in such an action bears the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that due to an irregularity, defect, or mistake committed during the voting or canvassing process the results of a recount using automatic tabulating equipment will produce incorrect recount results and that there is a substantial probability that recounting the ballots by hand or another method will produce a more correct result and change the outcome of the election.
(3) A court with whom a petition under sub. (2) is filed shall hear the matter as expeditiously as possible, without a jury. The court may order a recount of the ballots by hand or another method only if it determines that the petitioner has established by clear and convincing evidence that due to an irregularity, defect, or mistake committed during the voting or canvassing process the results of a recount using automatic tabulating equipment will produce incorrect recount results and that there is a substantial probability that recounting the ballots by hand or another method will produce a more correct result and change the outcome of the election. Nothing in this section affects the right of a candidate or elector aggrieved by the recount to appeal to circuit court under s. 9.01 (6) upon completion of the recount.
History: 1979 c. 311 ; 1987 a. 391 ; 2005 a. 92 , 451 ; 2007 a. 96 ; 2013 a. 176 ; 2015 a. 261 .
(2) Any candidate, or any elector when for a referendum, may, by the close of business on the next business day after the last day for filing a petition for a recount under s. 9.01 , petition the circuit court for an order requiring ballots under sub. (1) to be counted by hand or by another method approved by the court. The petitioner in such an action bears the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that due to an irregularity, defect, or mistake committed during the voting or canvassing process the results of a recount using automatic tabulating equipment will produce incorrect recount results and that there is a substantial probability that recounting the ballots by hand or another method will produce a more correct result and change the outcome of the election.
(3) A court with whom a petition under sub. (2) is filed shall hear the matter as expeditiously as possible, without a jury. The court may order a recount of the ballots by hand or another method only if it determines that the petitioner has established by clear and convincing evidence that due to an irregularity, defect, or mistake committed during the voting or canvassing process the results of a recount using automatic tabulating equipment will produce incorrect recount results and that there is a substantial probability that recounting the ballots by hand or another method will produce a more correct result and change the outcome of the election. Nothing in this section affects the right of a candidate or elector aggrieved by the recount to appeal to circuit court under s. 9.01 (6) upon completion of the recount.
History: 1979 c. 311 ; 1987 a. 391 ; 2005 a. 92 , 451 ; 2007 a. 96 ; 2013 a. 176 ; 2015 a. 261 .
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in Wisconsin?
Find a Wisconsin lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.