Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (2026)
Civil liability for forest fires
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
26.21(1)(1) In addition to the penalties provided in s. 26.20, the United States, the state, the county or private owners, whose property is injured or destroyed by forest fires, may recover, in a civil action, double the amount of damages suffered, if the fires occurred through willfulness, malice or negligence. In a civil action, a court may award reasonable costs for legal representation to provide owners recovering damages under this subsection.
26.21(2)(2) Persons causing fires in violation of this chapter shall be liable to the state in an action for debt, to the full amount of all damages done to the state lands and for all expenses incurred by the towns fighting forest fires and shall be liable to municipalities in an action for debt, to the full amount of all damages to the municipal lands and for all expenses incurred by the municipalities fighting such fires.
26.21 AnnotationThis section does not create liability in favor of a town. Town of Howard v. Soo Line Railroad Co., 63 Wis. 2d 500, 217 N.W.2d 329 (1974).
26.21 AnnotationSub. (1) is not limited to a specific class of tortfeasor, such as a railroad corporation, and a violation under s. 26.20 is not a prerequisite for applying sub. (1). The plain language of sub. (1) does not require “gross negligence.” Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Insurance Co., 2009 WI 27, 316 Wis. 2d 47, 762 N.W.2d 652, 07-0983.
26.21 AnnotationIf it is determined that the owner’s property was injured or destroyed by a forest fire that occurred through willfulness, malice, or negligence, the property owner is entitled to double damages as a matter of course. The use of “may” in sub. (1) does not authorize the recovery of double damages within the court’s discretion. Rather, the use of “may recover” indicates that a property owner, whose property is injured or destroyed by a forest fire, “may” choose to bring a civil action against the tortfeasor to recover double damages. Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Insurance Co., 2012 WI 26, 339 Wis. 2d 125, 810 N.W.2d 465, 10-0355.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1974–2017 · leading case: Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2009 WI 27 (Wis. 2009).
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2009 WI 27 (Wis. 2009). “2 could not be awarded double damages and attorney fees pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2007-08) 3 because that statute applies only to railroad corporations and none of the defendants are a railroad corporation.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins., 2012 WI 26 (Wis. 2012). “and several other landowners (collectively, Heritage Farms) whose properties were extensively damaged as a *133 result of a 2003 forest fire in Marquette and Waushara Counties, commonly referred to as the Crystal Lake Fire.”
Crown Castle USA, Inc. v. Orion Constr. Grp., LLC, 2012 WI 29 (Wis. 2012). “*284 regarding assets which ought to be subjected to the lien or discharge of a judgment is in the hands of third persons, and provide methods by which a judgment creditor may discover assets belonging to the judgment debtor in the possession of those third parties .”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins., 2011 WI App 12 (Wis. Ct. App. 2010). “appeals a judgment and an order of the circuit court denying its request for double damages under Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2007-08), 1 and his request for interest on any award of double damages and on the legal fees and costs incurred to obtain such damages.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2008 WI App 46 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “1 The dispositive issue on this appeal is whether Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2005-06), 2 which provides for double damages and reasonable attorney fees, applies in this case.”
Allenton Volunteer Fire Dep't v. Soo Line R.R., 372 F. Supp. 422 (E.D. Wis. 1974). “Section 26.21 allows owners of land who suffer property losses as a result of such failures to bring civil actions for double damages in some instances.”
Town of Howard v. Soo Line R.R., 217 N.W.2d 329 (Wis. 1974). “The town of Howard rests its claim, as did the trial court, upon the fact the fire was a forest fire for which the railroad is claimed to be liable under sec. 26.21, Stats. 2 This section allows the United States, the state, county, or private owner whose property is injured by…”
White v. City of Watertown, 2017 WI App 78 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017). “2d 652 ("Because the legislature did not so limit the application of § 26.21(1) to railroad corporations, we will not insert those words into the statute to create such a result.”
— Wis. Stat. § 26.21(1) — 5 cases
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2009 WI 27 (Wis. 2009). “2 could not be awarded double damages and attorney fees pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2007-08) 3 because that statute applies only to railroad corporations and none of the defendants are a railroad corporation.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins., 2012 WI 26 (Wis. 2012). “and several other landowners (collectively, Heritage Farms) whose properties were extensively damaged as a *133 result of a 2003 forest fire in Marquette and Waushara Counties, commonly referred to as the Crystal Lake Fire.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins., 2011 WI App 12 (Wis. Ct. App. 2010). “appeals a judgment and an order of the circuit court denying its request for double damages under Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2007-08), 1 and his request for interest on any award of double damages and on the legal fees and costs incurred to obtain such damages.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2008 WI App 46 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “1 The dispositive issue on this appeal is whether Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2005-06), 2 which provides for double damages and reasonable attorney fees, applies in this case.”
White v. City of Watertown, 2017 WI App 78 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017). “2d 652 ("Because the legislature did not so limit the application of § 26.21(1) to railroad corporations, we will not insert those words into the statute to create such a result.”
— Wis. Stat. § 26.21(2) — 2 cases
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins., 2012 WI 26 (Wis. 2012). “and several other landowners (collectively, Heritage Farms) whose properties were extensively damaged as a *133 result of a 2003 forest fire in Marquette and Waushara Counties, commonly referred to as the Crystal Lake Fire.”
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 2009 WI 27 (Wis. 2009). “2 could not be awarded double damages and attorney fees pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 26.21 (1) (2007-08) 3 because that statute applies only to railroad corporations and none of the defendants are a railroad corporation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.