Statutory interpretation often requires a court to review the legislative intent behind the statute. However, this task is not always easily undertaken when the intent of the legislature is itself unclear. A recent Wisconsin Supreme Court case illustrates the difficulty in properly interpreting arguably ambiguous statutory language. Nevertheless, this Comment hopes to demonstrate that by examining the history of remnant theory, it should be clear that uneconomic remnant claims in eminent domain proceedings were intended to be limited to situations where the partial taking creates either a physical remnant or a financial remnant. Furthermore, this Comment argues that the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s recent interpretation of Wisconsin’s uneconomic remnant statute has created a hybrid remnant claim that may burden public utility companies and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation in initiating eminent domain proceedings if the statute is not adequately modified.
Samuel A. Magnuson,
Picking up the Remnants Post-Waller: Properly Limiting the Scope of Uneconomic Remnant Claims in Wisconsin Eminent Domain Proceedings,
98 Marq. L. Rev. 1425
Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol98/iss3/9