Court Opinion

ID: 9875030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 22:22:39.78268+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:49.402364
License: Public Domain

¶ 71.
ANNETTE KINGSLAND ZIEGLER, J.
(concurring). I join the court's opinion. I write separately to make a brief observation about agency deference. While the subject of agency deference may currently be a "hot button" issue, the law in Wisconsin on the subject is well-established: under proper circumstances this court will defer, to varying degrees, to an agency's interpretation of a statute. See, e.g., Wisconsin Dep't of Revenue v. Menasha Corp., 2008 WI 88, ¶¶ 47-50, 311 Wis. 2d 579, 754 N.W.2d 95. The parties in this case did not ask the court to address whether changes to that approach are warranted. There is little doubt that ending the court's practice of according deference to agency interpretations of statutes would constitute a sea change in
*31Wisconsin law, and many interested parties would likely wish to weigh in. Consequently, I would want to see the issue set forth, briefed, and argued before expressing an opinion on the merits of such a change.
¶ 72. For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully concur.