Section 895.529 - Civil liability limitation; duty of care owed to trespassers(1) In this section: (a) "Possessor of real property" means an owner, lessee, tenant, or other lawful occupant of real property.(b) "Trespasser" means a natural person who enters or remains upon property in possession of another without express or implied consent.(2) Except as provided in sub. (3), a possessor of real property owes no duty of care to a trespasser.(3) A possessor of real property may be liable for injury or death to a trespasser under the following circumstances: (a) The possessor of real property willfully, wantonly, or recklessly caused the injury or death. This paragraph does not apply if the possessor used reasonable and necessary force for the purpose of self-defense or the defense of others under s. 939.48 or used reasonable and necessary force for the protection of property under s. 939.49 .(b) The person injured or killed was a child and all of the following apply: 1. The possessor of real property maintained, or allowed to exist, an artificial condition on the property that was inherently dangerous to children.2. The possessor of real property knew or should have known that children trespassed on the property.3. The possessor of real property knew or should have known that the artificial condition he or she maintained or allowed to exist was inherently dangerous to children and involved an unreasonable risk of serious bodily harm or death to children.4. The injured or killed child, because of his or her youth or tender age, did not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in entering onto the property, or in playing in close proximity to the inherently dangerous artificial condition.5. The possessor of real property could have reasonably provided safeguards that would have obviated the inherent danger without interfering with the purpose for which the artificial condition was maintained or allowed to exist.(4) This section does not create or increase any liability on the part of a possessor of real property for circumstances not specified under this section and does not affect any immunity from or defenses to liability available to a possessor of real property under common law or another statute. Under this section, property owners are merely required to refrain from willful, wanton, or reckless conduct directed towards a trespasser. Willful, wanton, or reckless conduct requires a plaintiff to allege facts establishing that the wrongdoer acted maliciously toward the plaintiff or in an intentional disregard of the rights of the plaintiff. Stroede v. Society Insurance, 2020 WI App 8, 390 Wis. 2d 817, 939 N.W.2d 614, 18-1880. Occupancy, in the context of sub. (1) (a), is the equivalent of lawful presence. Anyone who is lawfully present on the premises at the time of the incident is an "other lawful occupant." Therefore, the defendant in this case was entitled to the benefit of the trespasser defense whether he was a patron of the bar or an employee at the time of the incident. Stroede v. Society Insurance, 2020 WI App 8, 390 Wis. 2d 817, 939 N.W.2d 614, 18-1880.