ELR Citation: ELR 20325
No(s). 353 (Wis. Jun 25, 1971)

State attorney general may move under nuisance statute to abate air pollution nuisance from defendant's plant despite more recent and specific legislation empowering department of natural resources to regulate such matters. Nuisance statute was not expressly repealed and, particularly in view of the fact that legislature had broadened the scope of the nuisance statute more recently than it had enacted specific air pollution control legislation, the court cannot find that the nuisance statute was repealed by implication. Such repeals are not favored in law and can only be inferred where the two statutes are irreconcilable. Defendant's contention that the more specific statute governs cannot stand, because the two are not irreconcilable and there was no legislative intent evident to support contention. Argument that state administrative agency rather than court should assume primary jurisdiction here must fail because the basic questions involved are matters of law rather than fact.

Counsel for State of Wisconsin:
Robert W. Warren, Attorney General
William F. Eich, Asst. Attorney General
Arbid Sather, Deputy Attorney General
114 East State Capitol
Madison, WI 53702
(608) 266-1221

Counsel for Dairyland Power Cooperative:
Floyd E. Wheeler
Wheeler, Van Sickle, Day & Anderson
25 West Main Street
Madison, WI 53702
(608) 255-7277