Court Opinion

ID: 9633250
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:40:02.28702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:11:50.942605
License: Public Domain

LOCKWOOD, Justice
(dissenting).
I concur in the dissent by Justice Struckmeyer.
The well-reasoned approach to the court’s duty to determine whether any damage has been suffered by the 700,000 members of the public is consistent with the expressed view of the Legislature on the urgent question of air pollution.
It has long been recognized that each of the defendants has discharged into the atmosphere gasses, aerosols and particulate matter. That such discharge of gasses, aerosols and particulate matter has been transported into the Salt River Valley, with resultant restriction of visibility and damage to the natural beauty of the environment has long been maintained by various persons living in the Salt River Valley.
To say that they may not be joined in a class action would defeat the Legislative recognition of possible damage, as illustrated in the Air Pollution Control Act of 1967, A.R.S. § 36-1700, as amended.