895.77 History
History: 1993 a. 98.
895.79
895.79
Damage to certain machines. 895.79(1)
(1) An owner of a machine operated by the insertion of coins, currency, debit cards or credit cards that is damaged by a person acting with the intent to commit a theft from that machine may bring an action against the person.
895.79(2)
(2) The owner has the burden of proving his or her case under
sub. (1) by a preponderance of the credible evidence.
895.79(3)
(3) If the owner prevails in a civil action under
sub. (1), he or she may recover all of the following:
895.79(3)(b)
(b) Costs, including all reasonable attorney fees and other costs of the investigation and litigation that were reasonably incurred.
895.79(4)
(4) An owner may bring a civil action under
sub. (1) regardless of whether there has been a criminal action related to the damage under
sub. (1) and regardless of the outcome of any such criminal action.
895.79 History
History: 1995 a. 133.
895.80
895.80
Property damage or loss. 895.80(1)
(1) Any person who suffers damage or loss by reason of intentional conduct that occurs on or after November 1, 1995, and that is prohibited under
s. 943.01,
943.20,
943.21,
943.24,
943.26,
943.34,
943.395,
943.41,
943.50 or
943.61, or by reason of intentional conduct that occurs on or after April 28, 1998, and that is prohibited under
s. 943.201, has a cause of action against the person who caused the damage or loss.
895.80(2)
(2) The burden of proof in a civil action under
sub. (1) is with the person who suffers damage or loss to prove his or her case by a preponderance of the credible evidence.
895.80(3)
(3) If the plaintiff prevails in a civil action under
sub. (1), he or she may recover all of the following:
895.80(3)(b)
(b) All costs of investigation and litigation that were reasonably incurred.
895.80(4)
(4) A person may bring a civil action under
sub. (1) regardless of whether there has been a criminal action related to the loss or damage under
sub. (1) and regardless of the outcome of any such criminal action.
895.80(5)
(5) No person may bring a cause of action under both this section and
s. 943.212,
943.245 or
943.51 regarding the same incident or occurrence. If the plaintiff has a cause of action under both this section and
s. 943.212,
943.245 or
943.51 regarding the same incident or occurrence, the plaintiff may choose which action to bring.
895.80 History
History: 1995 a. 27;
1997 a. 101.
895.85
895.85
Punitive damages. 895.85(1)(a)
(a) "Defendant" means the party against whom punitive damages are sought.
895.85(1)(b)
(b) "Double damages" means those court awards made under a statute providing for twice, 2 times or double the amount of damages suffered by the injured party.
895.85(1)(c)
(c) "Plaintiff" means the party seeking to recover punitive damages.
895.85(1)(d)
(d) "Treble damages" means those court awards made under a statute providing for 3 times or treble the amount of damages suffered by the injured party.
895.85(3)
(3) Standard of conduct. The plaintiff may receive punitive damages if evidence is submitted showing that the defendant acted maliciously toward the plaintiff or in an intentional disregard of the rights of the plaintiff.
895.85(4)
(4) Procedure. If the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case for the allowance of punitive damages:
895.85(4)(a)
(a) The plaintiff may introduce evidence of the wealth of a defendant; and
895.85(4)(b)
(b) The judge shall submit to the jury a special verdict as to punitive damages or, if the case is tried to the court, the judge shall issue a special verdict as to punitive damages.
895.85(5)
(5) Application of joint and several liability. The rule of joint and several liability does not apply to punitive damages.
895.85 History
History: 1995 a. 17;
1997 a. 71.
895.85 Note
NOTE: The first 3 cases noted below were decided prior to the adoption of s. 895.85.
895.85 Annotation
Punitive damages may be awarded in product liability cases. Judicial controls over punitive damage awards established. Wangen v. Ford Motor Co. 97 W (2d) 260, 294 NW (2d) 437 (1980).
895.85 Annotation
Guidelines for submission of punitive damages issue to jury in product liability case discussed. Walter v. Cessna Aircraft Co. 121 W (2d) 221, 358 NW (2d) 816 (Ct. App. 1984).
895.85 Annotation
Regardless of classification of underlying cause of action, punitive damages are recoverable where defendant's conduct was "outrageous". Insurance coverage for punitive damages is not contrary to public policy. Brown v. Maxey, 124 W (2d) 426, 369 NW (2d) 677 (1985).
895.85 Annotation
In awarding punitive damages the factors to be considered are the grievousness of the wrongdoer's acts, the degree of malicious intent, the potential damage that might have been caused by the acts and the defendant's ability to pay. An award is excessive if it inflicts a punishment or burden that is disproportionate to the wrongdoing. That a judge provided a means for the defendant to avoid paying the punitive damages awarded did not render the award invalid. Gianoli v. Pfleiderer, 209 W (2d) 509, 563 NW (2d) 562 (Ct. App. 1997).
895.85 Annotation
Nominal damages may support a punitive damage award in an action for intentional trespass. A grossly excessive punishment violates due process. Whether punitive damages violate due process depends on the reprehensibility of the conduct, the disparity between the harm suffered and the punitive damages awarded and the difference between the award and other civil or criminal penalties authorized or imposed. Jacque v. Steenberg Homes, 209 W (2d) 605, 563 NW (2d) 154 (1997).
895.85 Annotation
A circuit court entering default judgment on a punitive damages claim must make inquiry beyond the complaint to determine the merits of the claim and the amount to be awarded. Apex Electronics Corp. v. Gee, 217 W (2d) 378, 571 NW (2d) 23 (1998).
895.85 Annotation
The Future of Punitive Damages. SPECIAL ISSUE: 1998 WLR No. 1.
