Bd. of Regents-Uw Sys. v. Decker

• Decision Date: 16 July 2014
• Docket Number: No. 2011AP2902.,2011AP2902.
• Parties: BOARD OF REGENTS–UW SYSTEM, Petitioner–Respondent–Petitioner, v. Jeffrey S. DECKER, Respondent–Appellant.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

355 Wis.2d 800
850 N.W.2d 112
2014 WI 68

BOARD OF REGENTS–UW SYSTEM, Petitioner–Respondent–Petitioner,
v.
Jeffrey S. DECKER, Respondent–Appellant.

No. 2011AP2902.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Argued Oct. 15, 2013.
Decided July 16, 2014.

[850 N.W.2d 114]

For the petitioner-respondent-petitioner, the cause was argued by R. Duane Harlow, assistant attorney general, with whom on the briefs was J.B. Van Hollen, attorney general.

For the respondent-appellant, there was brief by Gary Grass, Milwaukee, and oral argument by Gary Grass.

An amicus curiae brief was filed by James A. Friedman, Dustin B. Brown, and Godfrey & Kahn, S.C., Madison, on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin Foundation, Inc., and oral argument by Dustin B. Brown.

MICHAEL J. GABLEMAN, J.

¶ 1 This is a review of an unpublished decision of the court of appeals ¹ reversing a decision and order of the Dane County Circuit Court ² issuing a harassment injunction against defendant Jeffrey S. Decker pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 813.125 (2009–10).³

¶ 2 The question before us is whether the circuit court properly granted a harassment injunction under Wis. Stat. § 813.125, Wisconsin's harassment injunction statute. Decker argues that (1) Wis. Stat. § 813.125 does not extend protection to institutions; (2) his behavior did not constitute harassment under the statute; and (3) the harassment injunction granted by the circuit court was overbroad and vague. The Board of Regents concedes ⁴ that the injunction was overbroad but asserts that Wis. Stat. § 813.125 protects

[850 N.W.2d 115]

institutions as well as people, and further argues that Decker's conduct constituted harassment and lacked a legitimate purpose.

¶ 3 We hold that Wis. Stat. § 813.125 can extend injunctive protection to institutions as well as natural persons. We further hold that the circuit court's decision to grant a harassment injunction was a proper exercise of its discretion, and sufficient evidence existed for the court to find that Decker's conduct constituted harassment and lacked a legitimate purpose. However, because the parties agree the injunction was overbroad, we remand to the circuit court to refine the injunction and clarify its terms. For these reasons, the decision of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 4 Jeffrey S. Decker (“Decker”) is a former student of the University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point (“UWSP”). On August 13, 2010, Decker met with the UWSP Chancellor, Dr. Bernie Patterson, in the Chancellor's office to discuss Decker's concerns regarding segregated fees charged to students.⁵ During the meeting, Decker became agitated and began to talk about university employees in a derogatory manner. Decker also swore at the Chancellor and threatened to interfere with the Chancellor's upcoming State of the University address and donor function if his demands were not met.⁶ As tensions escalated during the meeting, Decker reached for a stack of papers on the Chancellor's conference table. The Chancellor informed Decker the papers did not belong to him and tried to pull the documents away, but Decker yanked the papers back and forcibly stabbed them with a pen. The Chancellor then called the police to remove Decker from his office.⁷ The Chancellor returned to his office approximately thirty minutes later and found the following note:

Threat: Due to rampant violations of of [sic] state law, ethical and professional standards and multiple commitments for communication, I shall soon demand the

[850 N.W.2d 116]

resignation of Kevin Reily [sic] and Bernie Patterson, or a dragon shall do it for all students. Jef Decker

¶ 5 As a result of Decker's behavior during his meeting with the Chancellor, Decker was brought before a Nonacademic Disciplinary Committee (“the Committee”), which found that Decker had engaged in Disorderly Conduct in violation of Wis. Admin. Code § 18.11(2).⁸ The Committee suspended Decker from UWSP for the period of November 19, 2010, through January 1, 2012. At the end of the disciplinary meeting, Decker informed the Committee that he had no intention of complying with the suspension.

¶ 6 Decker was true to his word. University of Wisconsin (“UW”) regulations provide that a suspended student is prohibited from being “present on any campus without the written consent of the chief administrative officer of that campus.” Wis. Admin. Code § UWS 17.17(4).⁹ Nevertheless, Decker continued to enter university property on at least four separate occasions after he was suspended, which are described in detail below. ¹⁰

¶ 7 On January 22, 2011, Decker requested permission from Chancellor Richard Wells of UW–Oshkosh to enter the campus, which was denied. In spite of Wells' denial, Decker went to an intercollegiate basketball game at UW–Oshkosh and distributed literature to attendees.

¶ 8 On September 1, 2011, Decker entered UW–Fox Valley property to attend a meeting between members of the UW student government and Ray Cross, the UW Colleges and UW–Extension Chancellor.¹¹ Decker interrupted the meeting while the Chancellor was posing a question to student government members. The Chancellor asked Decker to leave, but Decker continued to disrupt the meeting. The Chancellor then asked a colleague to call the police and apologetically explained to Decker: “I really hate to do this. If you

[850 N.W.2d 117]

had remained quiet, Jeff, I wouldn't have done that.” Decker responded by admonishing the Chancellor for not returning his phone calls, at which point the Chancellor started to leave the meeting. A student then asked Decker to remain silent: “Mr. Decker, this is our time to visit with the Chancellor.... I think it would be respectful if we could spend our time with him. We don't get a whole lot of time.”

¶ 9 Decker promised to be quiet, then after a brief pause, he hijacked the meeting entirely, spending several minutes talking about his suspension from UW. The Chancellor dismissed the meeting and left, followed by the students. The meeting was later reconvened in another room without Decker, who had moved on to a different meeting with the UW Colleges Assistant Deans for Administrative Services, where he was removed by police.

¶ 10 Decker's next recorded trespass onto UW property occurred on September 8, 2011, when Decker entered a meeting of the Board of Regents held at Van Hise Hall, located on the UW campus at Madison. Decker began to videotape and photograph the proceedings and was asked to leave by university police. ¹² Decker declined and continued to film the meeting. University police informed Decker that he was in violation of his suspension and repeated their request that Decker leave the meeting. Decker again refused, and campus police arrested him, at which point Decker went limp and was dragged out of the meeting. Decker was charged with criminal Trespass to Land under Wis. Stat. § 943.13(1m)(a),¹³ but charges were ultimately dismissed on April 23, 2012.

¶ 11 Decker's fourth documented trespass onto UW property occurred on September 19, 2011, when he entered a meeting of the UW–Fox Valley Board of Trustees held on the UW–Fox Valley campus. Decker began to speak at the meeting, but Interim Dean Keogh reminded Decker he was prohibited from entering UW property during his suspension and asked Decker to leave. Decker refused and began handing out literature to meeting attendees as he remarked:

I, myself, was personally assaulted by the chancellor of the UW–Stevens Point and [the] UW system saw fit to railroad and suspend me, all to protect hundreds of millions of dollars of corruption and the end of rule of law at the University of Wisconsin.... I'm not going to leave this meeting. You know, I'll just sit here until the cops haul me out.

By this time, the police had indeed been called. Decker again went limp and continued to denounce university fees as he was dragged from the room. ¹⁴ Decker was

[850 N.W.2d 118]

charged with Disorderly Conduct under Wis. Stat. § 947.01,¹⁵ and he pled no contest on January 9, 2012.

¶ 12 The UW Board of Regents petitioned the Dane County Circuit Court, Judge John Markson presiding, for a temporary restraining order against Decker on October 17, 2011. The petition named the University of Wisconsin System as the protected party. It requested Decker be required to (1) cease or avoid harassing the protected party; (2) avoid the protected party's residence and/or any premises it temporarily occupies; (3) avoid contact that harasses or intimidates the protected party; and (4) refrain from entering upon any real property owned by, leased by, or otherwise subject to the control of the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. The temporary restraining order was granted and an injunction hearing was scheduled for October 24, 2011.

¶ 13 UW–Oshkosh Police Chief Joseph LeMire attempted to serve the temporary restraining order papers on Decker on October 18, 2011. Decker was on his porch when the Chief arrived at his house, but when the Chief got out of his car, Decker went inside, closed the door, and refused to answer the doorbell. The Chief left and drove around the block, but when he returned, Decker's car was gone. A handgun hotline report later informed the Chief that, after Decker had left his house, he had immediately attempted to purchase a handgun.

¶ 14 On October 24, 2011, Judge Markson held an injunction hearing to discuss the Board of Regents' petition. The circuit court found that Decker attended meetings at UW,

knowing that he would be asked to leave, knowing that he was not intending to leave, and then necessarily what that would entail, which would be calling the officers and causing the sort of disturbance that was present on each of the occasions that were the subject of testimony.

The circuit court concluded that Decker's repeated entry onto UW property in willful violation of his suspension “constitutes conduct of a sort...