Nuisance Essay Shellie Hirchert Introduction to Torts Professor Michael Haggard 02/07/2011 Nuisance Essay Scenario: John Anderson produces rattlesnake anti-venom in his single family home located in a suburban neighborhood. Anderson has approximately 50 – 75 rattlesnakes in his home. Anderson produces and sells the rattlesnake anti-venom to medical supply companies who then sell the snake anti-venom to hospitals to treat victims of rattlesnake
Premium Tort Nuisance Public nuisance
Title: Environmental Nuisance Lawsuit Author: Trung Tran Author Affiliation: The Legal Environment Abstract The Environmental Protection Agency has statutory duty to investigate all the complaints relating to alleged nuisance. The environmental nuisance may be merely a right or wrong thing in a wrong place. The doctrines of nuisance and trespass revolve around the interference with a property owner’s (or the public’s) right and ability to enjoy his /her (or public) land. Nuisance actions may be private
Premium Nuisance Law Lawsuit
Privileged Attorney Work Product To: Professor From: Date: November 3‚ 2009 Re: Alicia Carmody’s claim against her Neighbor‚ Mr. John Ellis‚ for a private nuisance claim. QUESTION PRESENTED Under Vermont Common Law does Mr. John Ellis’ recently created chicken coop in a residential neighborhood constitutes a private nuisance when Mr. Ellis’ rooster and the hens generate odors and noises that could be considered unreasonable and substantial interferences with Ms. Alicia Carmody’s enjoyment
Premium Tort Odor Chicken
Ontario Hackland J. Heard: April 5-8 and 13-16‚ 2004. Judgment: May 20‚ 2004. (47 paras.) Damages -- For torts -- Affecting property -- Real property -- Nuisance -- Inconvenience -Psychological injuries -- Emotional distress -- Tort law -- Nuisance -- Injury to person. Action by Saelman and Wuerch against their neighbours‚ the Hills‚ for nuisance resulting from harassment following a property dispute. There were disagreements over the Hills’ hedge-cutting and snow clearing which affected the Saelman
Premium Tort Law Pleading
magisterial court have been empowered to issue order to remove or abate nuisance caused by noise pollution Sec 133 empower an executive magistrate to interfere and remove a public nuisance in the first instance with a conditional order and then with a permanent one. The provision can be utilized in case of nuisance of environment nature. He can adopt immediate measure to prevent danger or injury of a serious land to the public. For prevention of danger to human life‚ health or safety the
Premium Nuisance Tort Noise pollution
and nor could he be held vicariously liable for the contractors‚ who were clearly not his employees for that purpose.An action for trespass was unavailable‚ because the damage was not direct and immediate and at the time of the case the tort of nuisance could not be applied to an isolated escape.Nevertheless‚ the House of Lords held that the defendant was liable in tort‚ upholding the judgement delievered in the lower court by Blackburn J‚ which defined the rule:”A person who‚ for his own purposes
Premium Nuisance Tort Rylands v Fletcher
Defination Of Nuisances * “Unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land‚ or some right over‚ or in connection‚ with it.” Winfield & Jolowicz on Tort. * it involves interference with land‚ the claimant‚ as you will see‚ has to have an interest in land. * the aim of private nuisance is to protect interests in land‚ damages for personal injury are not recoverable under this tort. Who can sue? * It has traditionally protected interest in land. * Only a person
Premium Tort Nuisance Complaint
Simulation: Environmental Nuisance Lawsuit LAWS310 December 14‚ 2011 Factual Summary: Provide a succinct and accurate description of the scenario at hand. Summarize the scenario to include all relevant facts. A neighborhood group called NICE is utilizing the principles of common law-private and public nuisance and trespass- to bring attention to the problem of air‚ ground‚ and water pollution which is occurring on adjoining land to the Northfield Dairy Farm. This farmland is very expansive
Premium Tort Law Property
Question Presented Whether Sherman‚ under the attractive nuisance doctrine‚ will likely prevail against Carlisle for multiple injuries he sustained in a fall from wooden steps of a tree house in disrepair while trespassing upon Carlisle’s property when: (1) Carlisle was aware that the neighborhood surrounding his property was populated with children; (2) a severe storm had damaged Carlisle’s property and exposed the previously concealed tree house; (3) Sherman was six years of age at the time of
Premium Property Tort Ownership
removal. English Law: In English Law‚ there is private nuisance‚ which is “the unreasonable and unjustified intervention by the defendant in the use of his land with the plaintiff’s right to enjoy his property.”[2] The ways judges decide whether an act constitutes a nuisance are by looking at the duration‚ extent and type of disturbance‚ the type of neighbourhood‚ the motivation and offensiveness. The remedy for an action of nuisance is either an injunction or a payment of damages.[3] In this
Premium Law Common law Nuisance