Answer Questions #1 and #3 following the Prah v. Maretti case:

1.) What has changed today that influenced the court to reassess the repudiation of the doctrine of ancient lights?

2.)Given the reasoning of the court, can we state with confidence that the right to access to sunlight is permanently settled in Wisconsin? Explain.

3.) Would the question of solar access be better handled by a method that is akin to the statutory permit system adopted in some states for allocation of water rights?"