Court Opinion

ID: 9672840
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:01:19.60794+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:18.681280
License: Public Domain

The following opinion was filed June 30, 1978.

PER CURIAM

(on motion for rehearing).

On their motion for rehearing the plaintiffs contend that the proceedings in the circuit court must be stayed pending W.E.R.C.’s factual determination or they will be prejudiced by the inability of W.E.R.C. to hear class actions. Sec. 111.07(2) (a), Stats. (1975).1 A stay in the trial court pending administrative proceedings is proper where necessary to avoid possible prejudice to one of the parties. United States v. Michigan National Corp., 419 U.S. 1, 95 S. Ct. 10, 42 L. Ed.2d 1 (1974).
In this case, as in all cases where questions of primary jurisdiction occur, both the trial court and the administrative agency have concurrent jurisdiction. Browne v. Milwaukee Bd. of School Directors, 69 Wis.2d 169, 175, *341230 N.W.2d 704 (1975). The trial court may therefore retain jurisdiction until W.E.E.C. makes its factual determination concerning fair share dues. The plaintiffs’ claims may be maintained before W.E.E.C. in the form of the class action that has already been commenced in the circuit court.
When W.E.E.C. has determined all issues before it, both W.E.E.C. and the trial court will be precluded from any further action. The trial court may not retain jurisdiction of this case for purposes of ch. 227 review of W.E.E.C.’s decision.
The motion for rehearing is denied.

 The plaintiffs also contend that they will be prejudiced by the one year statute of limitations applicable to prohibited labor practices. Sec. 111.07(14), Stats. (1975). We disagree. The plaintiffs’ present complaint before the circuit court properly alleges an unfair labor practice as that term has been defined by this court’s opinion in this case.