38.1 Private & Public Nuisance

38.1 Private & Public Nuisance

NCBE's fourth Torts area covers other torts, beginning with nuisance and its defenses. Nuisance describes a type of harm—interference with the use and enjoyment of land or with public rights—rather than a single kind of conduct.

---

The Law of Nuisance

Nuisance is not a standalone tort with a single rigid definition; rather, it describes a type of injury—an interference with rights in land. The law distinguishes sharply between private nuisance and public nuisance.

1. Private Nuisance

A private nuisance is a substantial and unreasonable interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of real property.

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                     PRIVATE NUISANCE PRIMA FACIE CASE                      │
├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  1. POSSESSORY INTEREST   Plaintiff must possess an ownership or           │
│                           leasehold interest in the affected land.         │
│                                     │                                      │
│                                     ▼                                      │
│  2. SUBSTANTIAL           Interference must be offensive, inconvenient,    │
│     INTERFERENCE          or annoying to an AVERAGE, REASONABLE person.    │
│                           (Hypersensitive plaintiffs barred).              │
│                                     │                                      │
│                                     ▼                                      │
│  3. UNREASONABLE          Gravity of the harm to plaintiff outweighs the   │
│     INTERFERENCE          social utility of defendant's conduct.           │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

A. Substantial Interference (Objective Standard)

The interference must be offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to an average, ordinary person of normal sensitivity in the community.

• Hypersensitive Plaintiffs: If the condition bothers only the plaintiff because of an unusual sensitivity or an especially delicate use of land (e.g., operating an ultra-sensitive electronics laboratory), it is not a private nuisance unless an ordinary person or an ordinary use of land would also be substantially affected.

B. Unreasonable Interference (Balancing Test)

Even substantial harm is not actionable unless it is unreasonable. The court balances the gravity of the harm against the social utility of the defendant's conduct:

• Factors Weighing Harm: Extent and duration of the interference; character of the harm; suitability of the neighborhood; burden on plaintiff to avoid harm.
• Factors Weighing Utility: Social value of defendant's enterprise (e.g., a cement factory providing regional jobs); economic infeasibility of eliminating the condition; suitability of the location to the industrial activity.

C. Nuisance vs. Trespass to Land

• Trespass to Land: An invasion of the plaintiff's interest in the exclusive physical possession of land by tangible persons or physical objects (e.g., walking onto land, throwing stones onto land).
• Private Nuisance: An invasion of the plaintiff's interest in the use and enjoyment of land by intangible forces (e.g., noxious odors, concussive noise, blinding light, industrial vibrations, toxic gases, or smoke). The same conduct can be both a trespass and a nuisance, and some courts treat invisible particles that settle on land as a trespass (see Section 33.2).

D. Defenses in Private Nuisance

• "Coming to the Nuisance": The fact that the plaintiff purchased property adjacent to an already operational commercial enterprise (e.g., building a subdivision next to a 30-year-old feedlot) is NOT an absolute defense that bars recovery. However, it is a significant factor weighed by the court in balancing equities to determine whether an injunction or damages is appropriate.
• Zoning Compliance: Compliance with local municipal zoning laws is admissible evidence of reasonableness, but it is not a complete defense to common law nuisance.

2. Public Nuisance

A public nuisance is an act or condition that unreasonably interferes with a right common to the general public (e.g., public health, public safety, public peace, comfort, or convenience, such as blocking a navigable waterway or operating an illegal gambling den).

• Standing to Sue:
  • Government Officials: A public nuisance action is ordinarily prosecuted by public authorities (district attorneys, state attorneys general, municipal city attorneys).
  • Private Citizens (The Special Harm Rule): A private individual may bring a civil action for public nuisance ONLY IF the private citizen suffered a "special harm" or "unique injury" different in kind, not merely in degree, from the harm suffered by the general public.
  • Classic MBE Example: An industrial plant spills toxic chemicals into a commercial harbor, shutting down all maritime traffic for two weeks. Recreational boaters who cannot sail suffer the same kind of harm as the public (merely a difference in degree) and have no standing. A licensed commercial fisherman whose fishing waters are destroyed suffers a catastrophic destruction of commercial livelihood—a harm different in kind—and has standing to sue for public nuisance.

---

More on Nuisance

Bases of Liability

Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts, a defendant is liable for a private nuisance if the invasion is either intentional and unreasonable, or unintentional but caused by negligent or reckless conduct or an abnormally dangerous activity. An invasion is intentional if the defendant acts for the purpose of causing it or knows that it is resulting or substantially certain to result. A factory that keeps emitting smoke after neighbors complain is therefore causing an intentional invasion. An intentional invasion is unreasonable if the gravity of the harm outweighs the utility of the conduct, or if the harm is serious and the defendant could compensate for it and still continue operating.

Common Examples

• Usually actionable: Persistent loud noise, noxious odors from livestock operations, pollution, strong vibrations, and bright lights shining into homes.
• Usually not actionable: Blocking a neighbor's view, light, or air (Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five, Inc., Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1959), although Wisconsin allowed a nuisance claim for blocking sunlight to solar panels (Prah v. Maretti, Wis. 1982). Unsightly but lawful uses and fears about declining property values alone generally are not nuisances.
• Spite fences: Many states treat a structure built maliciously and without a useful purpose, such as a tall fence meant only to annoy a neighbor, as a nuisance.

Remedies

• Damages: A plaintiff may recover for past harm, such as discomfort, loss of use and enjoyment, and reduced rental or market value. When a court denies an injunction, it may award permanent damages for future harm.
• Injunctions: In deciding whether to enjoin a nuisance, courts balance the hardships to the parties, the public interest, and the parties' conduct.
• Permanent damages instead of closure: In Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co. (N.Y. 1970), a cement plant's dust and vibrations were a nuisance, but because closing the plant would cause enormous losses, the court granted an injunction that would be vacated once the plant paid the neighbors permanent damages.
• Compensated injunction: In Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development Co. (Ariz. 1972), a developer built a retirement community near an established cattle feedlot. The court enjoined the feedlot as a nuisance to the new residents but required the developer, which had come to the nuisance, to pay the feedlot's costs of moving or shutting down.
• Self-help abatement: After notice and a refusal to act, a person harmed by a private nuisance may use reasonable force to abate it if doing so does not breach the peace. A private person may abate a public nuisance only if she suffers special harm.

Public Nuisance in More Detail

• Statutory nuisances: Many public nuisances, such as buildings used for illegal drug sales, are defined by statute and may be abated by public officials.
• Products and public nuisance: Courts are divided on whether public nuisance law reaches harms caused by lawful products. For example, the Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected a public nuisance claim against an opioid manufacturer in 2021 (State ex rel. Hunter v. Johnson & Johnson).

More on Defenses

• Right-to-farm statutes: Every state has a right-to-farm law that protects established agricultural operations from nuisance claims when the surrounding area changes, typically if the operation existed first and complies with applicable laws.
• Statutory authorization: An activity expressly authorized by legislation may be protected from nuisance liability, except for harm caused by operating it negligently.
• Plaintiff's conduct: Contributory negligence is not a defense to an intentional nuisance, but comparative fault may reduce recovery when the nuisance claim is based on the defendant's negligence.