## Facts

- Harvey and Lois Jacque owned rural land in Wisconsin and were highly protective of excluding others after a prior adverse possession loss.
- A neighbor bought a mobile home from Steenberg Homes, Inc., which agreed to deliver it.
- Steenberg determined the easiest delivery route was across the Jacques’ snow-covered field rather than using an alternative route obstructed by snow and difficult turns.
- Steenberg repeatedly requested permission to cross the Jacques’ land; the Jacques repeatedly and clearly refused.
- On the delivery day, after being stopped and refused again, Steenberg’s assistant manager instructed employees to proceed regardless of the Jacques’ refusal.
- Steenberg plowed a path through the field and transported the mobile home across the property over the Jacques’ objections; a truck was positioned to obstruct the Jacques’ view.
- The Jacques sued for intentional trespass to land; Steenberg conceded the trespass but argued punitive damages were unavailable absent proven compensatory damages.

## Issues

1. Whether punitive damages may be awarded for intentional trespass to land when the plaintiff proves no compensatory damages and receives only nominal damages.
2. Whether a $100,000 punitive damages award tied to $1 nominal damages violates due process as constitutionally excessive.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and circuit court and remanded with directions to reinstate the jury’s $100,000 punitive damages award.
- The court held that nominal damages awarded for intentional trespass may support punitive damages in the jury’s discretion.
- The court held the $100,000 punitive award was not unconstitutionally excessive given the defendant’s conduct and the need for deterrence.

## Legal Principles

- Intentional trespass invades the legally protected right to exclude; measurable property damage is not required for legally cognizable injury.
- Nominal damages can satisfy the “actual harm” predicate for punitive damages in intentional trespass to land cases.
- Punitive damages may be used to deter intentional trespass where nominal liability would otherwise make deliberate entry economically rational.
- Excessiveness review of punitive damages considers reprehensibility, the relationship between the wrong and the punitive award, and comparison to available civil or criminal penalties; substantial punitive awards can be justified when statutory penalties are trivial and conduct is deliberate.

## Conclusion

The court treated intentional, repeated disregard of a landowner’s refusal to permit entry as a serious invasion of the right to exclude, held that nominal damages can support punitive damages for intentional trespass, and upheld a $100,000 punitive award as a permissible deterrent and not a due process violation.


Jacque v. Steenberg Homes, Inc., 209 Wis. 2d 605, 563 N.W.2d 154 (Wis. 1997)