Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (2026)
Abuse and neglect of patients and residents
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
940.295(1)(km)(km) “Negligence” means an act, omission, or course of conduct that the actor should realize creates a substantial and unreasonable risk of death, great bodily harm, or bodily harm to another person.
940.295(1)(L)1.1. Receives care or treatment from a facility or program under sub. (2), from an employee of a facility or program or from a person providing services under contract with a facility or program.
940.295(1)(L)2.2. Arrives at a facility or program under sub. (2) for the purpose of receiving care or treatment from a facility or program under sub. (2), from an employee of a facility or program under sub. (2), or from a person providing services under contract with a facility or program under sub. (2).
940.295(1)(o)(o) “Recklessly” means conduct that creates a situation of unreasonable risk of death or harm to and demonstrates a conscious disregard for the safety of the patient or resident.
940.295(2)(2) Applicability. This section applies to any of the following types of facilities or programs:
940.295(2)(j)(j) The Wisconsin Educational Services Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing under s. 115.52 and the Wisconsin Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired under s. 115.525.
940.295(2)(m)(m) A residential care center for children and youth operated by a child welfare agency licensed under s. 48.60 or an institution operated by a public agency for the care of neglected, dependent, or delinquent children.
940.295(2)(n)(n) Any other health facility or care-related facility or home, whether publicly or privately owned.
940.295(3)(a)(a) Any person in charge of or employed in any facility or program under sub. (2) who does any of the following, or who knowingly permits another person to do so, may be penalized under par. (b):
940.295(3)(a)3.3. Except as provided in par. (am), abuses, with negligence, or neglects a patient or a resident.
940.295(3)(am)(am) Paragraph (a) 3. does not apply to a health care provider acting in the scope of his or her practice or employment who commits an act or omission of mere inefficiency, unsatisfactory conduct, or failure in good performance as the result of inability, incapacity, inadvertency, ordinary negligence, or good faith error in judgment or discretion.
940.295(3)(b)1g.1g. Any person violating par. (a) 1. or 2. under circumstances that cause death to an individual at risk is guilty of a Class C felony. Any person violating par. (a) 3. under circumstances that cause death to an individual at risk is guilty of a Class D felony.
940.295(3)(b)1m.1m. Any person violating par. (a) under circumstances that cause great bodily harm to an individual at risk is guilty of a Class E felony.
940.295(3)(b)1r.1r. Except as provided in subd. 1m., any person violating par. (a) 1. under circumstances that cause great bodily harm is guilty of a Class F felony. Any person violating par. (a) 1. under circumstances that are likely to cause great bodily harm is guilty of a Class G felony.
940.295(3)(b)2.2. Any person violating par. (a) 1. under circumstances that cause bodily harm is guilty of a Class H felony. Any person violating par. (a) 1. under circumstances that are likely to cause bodily harm is guilty of a Class I felony.
940.295(3)(b)3.3. Except as provided in subd. 1m., any person violating par. (a) 2. or 3. under circumstances that cause great bodily harm is guilty of a Class H felony. Any person violating par. (a) 2. or 3. under circumstances that are likely to cause great bodily harm is guilty of a Class I felony.
940.295(3)(b)4.4. Any person violating par. (a) 2. or 3. under circumstances that cause or are likely to cause bodily harm is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
940.295(3)(b)5.5. Any person violating par. (a) 1., 2. or 3. under circumstances not causing and not likely to cause bodily harm is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.
940.295 HistoryHistory: 1993 a. 445; 1995 a. 225; 1997 a. 180; 1999 a. 9; 2001 a. 57, 59, 109; 2005 a. 264, 388; 2007 a. 45; 2011 a. 2.
940.295 AnnotationEvidence that residents suffered weight loss and bedsores was sufficient to support the conviction of a nursing home administrator for abuse of residents. State v. Serebin, 119 Wis. 2d 837, 350 N.W.2d 65 (1984).
940.295 AnnotationSection 50.135 (1), as incorporated in sub. (1) (i), requires that all of the specifically enumerated facilities must be places licensed or approved by the Department of Health and Family Services. A VA hospital is subject to federal regulation but is not licensed or regulated by the state and thus not within the definition of inpatient health care facility. State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 156, 276 Wis. 2d 107, 687 N.W.2d 50, 03-1514.
940.295 AnnotationSeeking Justice in Death’s Waiting Room: Barriers to Effectively Prosecuting Crime in Long-term Care Facilities. Hanrahan. Wis. Law. Aug. 2004.
940.295 AnnotationA Response: Issues Affecting Long-term Care. Purtell. Wis. Law. Oct. 2004.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2021 · leading case: Tatge v. Chambers & Owen, Inc., 579 N.W.2d 217 (Wis. 1998).
Tatge v. Chambers & Owen, Inc., 579 N.W.2d 217 (Wis. 1998). “In Hausman, we determined that Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3) (1993-94) evidences a strong public policy of protecting nursing home residents, such that the narrow Brockmeyer exception should be expanded to include an employee's actions which comply with an affirmative obligation to…”
Hausman v. St. Croix Care Ctr., 571 N.W.2d 393 (Wis. 1997). “We also find the public policy of protecting nursing home residents to be present in Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3)'s imposition of criminal penalties on workers who knowingly permit abuse or neglect to occur.”
Preston v. Meriter Hosp., Inc., 2005 WI 122 (Wis. 2005). “Preston sued Meriter for (1) medical negligence; (2) failure to obtain informed consent; and (3) neglect of a patient, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (1)(j)1. (1997-98), [4] in addition to (4) violation of EMTALA.”
State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 156 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “" The referenced statute, Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (2), identifies the following facilities or programs in the cited paragraphs: (b) an adult family home; (c) a community-based residential facility; (h) an inpatient health care facility; and (k) a state treatment facility.”
Jankee v. Clark Cnty., 2000 WI 64 (Wis. 2000). “See also Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (1997-98). This statute, first enacted in 1994 and modified twice thereafter, authorized criminal penalties for the negligent "neglect" of a patient in an inpatient health care facility.”
Asma Masri v. State of Wisconsin Labor & Indus. Review, 2014 WI 81 (Wis. 2014). “at 667-69 (citing Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3) (1993- 94) as one law that creates an obligation to report concerns).”
Strozinsky v. Sch. Dist. of Brown Deer, 2000 WI 97 (Wis. 2000). “11 We modified the Brockmeyer exception only after concluding that Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3) imposes an affirmative, legal obligation to report abuse or neglect.”
Preston v. Meriter Hosp., Inc., 2008 WI App 25 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “Preston sued Meriter for: (1) medical negligence; (2) failing to obtain informed consent; (3) neglecting a patient in violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (l)(j)l. (1997-98); 1 and (4) violating EMTALA, 42 U.”
Goggins v. Rogers Mem'l Hosp. Inc., 2004 WI App 113 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “Goggins argues by analogy that her actions were also driven by an affirmative statutory duty, under Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3)(a), to report suspected patient abuse or neglect.”
Preston v. Meriter Hosp., Inc., 2004 WI App 61 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “She does not, however, appeal the dismissal of her Wis. Stat. § 940.295 claim. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶ 9.”
Brown v. Pick 'N Save Food Stores, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (E.D. Wis. 2001). “In reaching this conclusion the court relied upon the fact that the plaintiffs had an affirmative obligation under Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3) to prevent known or suspected abuse or neglect of nursing home patients, or else be subject to criminal prosecution themselves.”
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(1)(k) — 1 case
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(1)(o) — 1 case
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(2) — 1 case
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(2)(k) — 1 case
State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 156 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “" The referenced statute, Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (2), identifies the following facilities or programs in the cited paragraphs: (b) an adult family home; (c) a community-based residential facility; (h) an inpatient health care facility; and (k) a state treatment facility.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(3) — 1 case
Tatge v. Chambers & Owen, Inc., 579 N.W.2d 217 (Wis. 1998). “In Hausman, we determined that Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3) (1993-94) evidences a strong public policy of protecting nursing home residents, such that the narrow Brockmeyer exception should be expanded to include an employee's actions which comply with an affirmative obligation to…”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(3)(a) — 2 cases
Goggins v. Rogers Mem'l Hosp. Inc., 2004 WI App 113 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “Goggins argues by analogy that her actions were also driven by an affirmative statutory duty, under Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (3)(a), to report suspected patient abuse or neglect.”
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(3)(am) — 1 case
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(3)(b) — 1 case
State v. Kayla C. Murphy (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “This absurd result contravenes our rules of statutory interpretation and, therefore, cannot be what the legislature intended.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(j) — 1 case
Preston v. Meriter Hosp., Inc., 2004 WI App 61 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “She does not, however, appeal the dismissal of her Wis. Stat. § 940.295 claim. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶ 9.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(l)(i) — 1 case
State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 156 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “" The referenced statute, Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (2), identifies the following facilities or programs in the cited paragraphs: (b) an adult family home; (c) a community-based residential facility; (h) an inpatient health care facility; and (k) a state treatment facility.”
— Wis. Stat. § 940.295(l)(j) — 1 case
Preston v. Meriter Hosp., Inc., 2008 WI App 25 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “Preston sued Meriter for: (1) medical negligence; (2) failing to obtain informed consent; (3) neglecting a patient in violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.295 (l)(j)l. (1997-98); 1 and (4) violating EMTALA, 42 U.”
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.