Pair Sues for Late-Night Noise, Other Nuisances

Elaine and Steven own a home near the home of Mary and William who, allegedly, at their residence operate a noisy tree chipper, engage in late-night noisy basketball games, park many cars on their property and pour motor oil on the roof of their house.

Because Elaine and Steven felt this activity was hurting the enjoyableness and market value of their home, they sued Mary and William for abatement of the private nuisances and for monetary damages. But Mary and William replied that if they stop the alleged nuisances they should not have to also pay damages since the nuisances no longer exist.

If you were the judge would you (1) order Mary and William to abate the alleged nuisances and (2) require them to pay monetary damages to Elaine and Steven? The judge ordered the nuisances abated but denied monetary damages.

When a court orders a private nuisance abated, the judge explained, if the defendant fails to comply the court can find the defendant in contempt of court and apply suitable sanctions. However, it is presumed a person before the court will obey a court order, he continued, so there is no need to require Mary and William to pay damages to their neighbors.

The court ordered Mary and William to immediately abate the private nuisances but if they fail to do so they will be found in contempt of court, the judge ruled.

Based on the 1992 California Court of Appeal decision in Alexander vs. McKnight, 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 453.