Court Opinion

ID: 9706215
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 01:35:04.645715+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:20.374038
License: Public Domain

JON P. WILCOX, J.
¶ 40. (concurring). While I agree with the majority that there are genuine issues of material fact on both issues, I believe the majority has side-stepped its duty by failing to clearly set forth standards courts should apply when reviewing whether there has been a violation of Wis. Stat. § 101.645. The majority indicates that there are three provisions of § 101.645 which come into play in this *269case — § 101.645(2), (3), and (4).1 Majority at 264-66. The majority submits that "under some circumstances simultaneous compliance with. . .these provisions. . .might not be possible." Majority at 266. The majority does not explain, however, what constitutes a violation of the statute: does a violation of one of these provisions establish a violation of the statute or does compliance with one of these provisions constitute compliance with the statute.
¶ 41. While this strikes me as a question of statutory interpretation, the majority seemingly leaves it to the circuit courts to answer. Yet, the supreme court is the law-declaring court whose purpose is "to oversee and implement the statewide development of the law." Cook v. Cook, 208 Wis. 2d 166, 189, 560 N.W.2d 246 (1997) (quotations omitted).2 Because the majority eschews the question, I respectfully concur.
*270¶ 42. I am authorized to state that Justices William A. Bablitch and N. Patrick Crooks join this concurring opinion.

 Wisconsin Stat. § 101.645 provides in part:
(2) Approval and Installation. A smoke detector required under this section shall be approved and installed as required under § 101.145(2) and (3)(a).
(3) Requirement. The owner of a dwelling shall install a functional smoke detector in the basement of the dwelling and on each floor level except the attic or storage area of each dwelling unit....
(4) INSPECTION. The department or a municipal authority may inspect new dwellings, may inspect the common areas of dwellings and, at the request of the-owner or renter, may inspect the interior of a dwelling unit in a dwelling to ensure compliance with this section.

 The majority also leaves the development of the law to the court of appeals by affirming its conclusion that § 101.645 is a safety statute, a violation of which constitutes negligence per se. See Johnson v. Blackburn, 220 Wis. 2d 260, 282, 582 N.W.2d 488 (Ct. App. 1998).