 |
studentJD |
|
|
Students Helping Students |
Currently Briefing & Updating |
© 2010 No content replication for monetary use of any kind is allowed without express written permission
|
Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development, 1494 P.2d 700 |
Supreme Court of Arizona |
1972 |
|
Chapter |
15 |
Title |
Nuisance |
|
Page |
614 |
Topic |
Private Nuisance |
|
Quick Notes |
The Df owned cattle feedlots prior to the construction of Pl's nearby residential development. The Pl was complaining of Public nuisance because of the flies and the odor. Although a feedlot can be enjoined to stop and/or move, the developer can indemnify the feedlot if the developer foreseeably brought the population into the previously agricultural or industrial area. |
||
|
Book Name |
Torts Cases, Problems, And Exercises. Weaver, Third Edition. ISBN: 978-1-4224-7220-0. |
||
|
Issue |
o Whether Spur may be enjoined? (yes) and whether Webb indemnify Spur? Yes. |
|
Procedure |
|
|
Trial |
o Judgment permanently enjoining [prohibiting] the Df - Spur, from operating a cattle feedlot near the Pl - Webb |
|
Supreme |
o Affirmed in part (Injunction), Remanded in Part (Damages sustained to Spur). |
|
Facts |
Reason |
Rules |
|
o Pl - Del E. Webb o Df - Spur Industries What happened? o Defendant owned cattle feedlots prior to the construction of plaintiff's nearby residential development. o Plaintiff sued defendant, claiming that the feedlots were a public nuisance because of the flies and odor that drifted toward the development. o Judgment permanently enjoining [prohibiting] the Df - Spur, from operating a cattle feedlot near the Pl - Webb. Brief History o 1911 - Spur family started farming started. o 1950 Youngtown Retirement Community Started. o 1956 Spurs developed feedlots. o 1959 Webb began Sun City Development. He bought 20,000 for $750 per acre ($15 million). o 1959 Webb started golf course. o 1960 Spur purchased land in question, for rebuilding and expanding. o 1960 Webb started offering homes 10.5 miles north of Spur. o Webb continued to develop south toward the feedlot getting within 500 feet. Webbs Complaint o Alleging 1300 lots in the southwest portion were unfit for development, because of Spurs feedlot. o Public nuisance because of the flies and the odor which were drifting or being blown by the prevailing south to north wind over the southern portion of Sun City. o Spur was feeding between 20K and 30K head of cattle. Testimony o 1 million pounds of manure/day |
Trial Court (Shut Down Feed Lot) o Feed pens had become a nuisance to the people who resided in the south part of Webbs development. o Some citizens of Sun city were unable to enjoy the outdoor living which Webb had adversities. o Webb faced sales resistance. o Spur shutdown operation and appealed.
May Spur Be enjoined?
Private Nuisance o A private nuisance is one affecting a single individual or a definite small number of persons in the enjoyment of private rights not common to the public.
Public Nuisance o Public nuisance is one affecting the rights enjoyed by citizens as a part of the public. o To constitute a public nuisance, the nuisance must affect a considerable number of people or an entire community or neighborhood.
Rule Remedy o Where the injury is slight, the remedy for minor inconveniences lies in an action for damages rather than in one for an injunction.
Public Nuisance Statute 36-601 o The following conditions are specifically declared public nuisances dangerous to the public health: 1. Any condition or place in populous areas which constitutes a breeding place for flies, rodents, mosquitoes and other insects which are capable of carrying and transmitting disease-causing organisms to any person or persons.
Declaring a business a public nuisance o There must be a "populous" area in which people are injured. o A locality and surroundings are of the first importance. o A business which is not per se a public nuisance may become such by being carried on at a place where the health, comfort, or convenience of a populous neighborhood is affected.
Holding May Spur be enjoined? o Most residents of Youngtown would be entitled to damages rather than injunctive relief. o Spurs operation was an enjoinable public nuisance for the southern portion of Webbs Sun City. o It is clear that Spurs feedlot was both a public and private nuisance to the citizens of Sun City. o Affirmed.
Must Webb Indemnify Spur? Public Interest Concerns o Courts of equity may both give and withhold relief in furtherance of the public interest when only private interests are involved. o The granting or withholding of relief may properly be dependent upon considerations of public interest
Lawful Owner Concerns o Courts of equity are concerned with protecting the operator of a lawfully, albeit noxious, business from the result of a knowing and willful encroachment by others near his business.
Coming to the Nuisance Cases o The courts have held that the residential landowner may not have relief if he knowingly came into a neighborhood reserved for industrial or agricultural endeavors and has been damaged thereby. o In such an area plaintiffs cannot complain that legitimate agricultural pursuits are being carried on in the vicinity, nor can plaintiffs, having chosen to build in an agricultural area, complain that the agricultural pursuits carried on in the area depreciate the value of their homes.
Reasons To Live In The Suburbs 1. Taxes, 2. Utilities and 3. Get Away from Congestion.
Rule o A party cannot justly call upon the law to make that place suitable for his residence which was not so when he selected it. o There are no rigid rules for the law of nuisance. It is elastic.
Reasoning o Spur is required to move not because he did anything wrong, but because of a proper and legitimate regard of the courts for the rights and interests of the public. o It does not seem harsh to require a developer, who has taken advantage of the lesser land values in a rural area as well as the availability of large tracts of land on which to build and develop a new town or city in the area, to indemnify those who are forced to leave as a result.
Holding o We must indemnify Spur for a reasonable amount of the cost of moving or shutting down. o Remanded to the trial court for a hearing upon the damages sustained by the defendant Spur as a reasonable and direct result of the granting of the permanent injunction. o Affirmed (Injunction) in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
|
|
|
Class Notes |
|
The Df owned cattle feedlots prior to the construction of Pl's nearby residential development. The Pl was complaining of Public nuisance because of the flies and the odor. o Court concludes Del is able to get an injunction on Spur, however, Del has to pay to move spur if it wants the injunction o This was a conditional injunction i.e., conditional on Del paying Spur to move o Coming to the nuisance defense by Spur Why is this not a complete defense from a policy standpoint? The natural growth of cities is into areas that once was rural. o Spur is required to move not because he did anything wrong, but because of a proper and legitimate regard of the rights and interests of the public.
o Went from 6000 head of cows to 30000 head of cows.
Webb went out to the country because the land was cheap.
Public Nuisance Affects the public. Private Nuisance Affects Webb from selling more land.
Coming to the Nuisance Cases o The courts have held that the residential landowner may not have relief if he knowingly came into a neighborhood reserved for industrial or agricultural endeavors and has been damaged thereby. o In such an area plaintiffs cannot complain that legitimate agricultural pursuits are being carried on in the vicinity, nor can plaintiffs, having chosen to build in an agricultural area, complain that the agricultural pursuits carried on in the area depreciate the value of their homes.
Rule o A party cannot justly call upon the law to make that place suitable for his residence which was not so when he selected it. o There are no rigid rules for the law of nuisance. It is elastic.
Considerations o The natural growth of the city is into the rural areas. o The cattle grew from 6000 to 30000, which did not seem as a nuisance at the time.
Webb Took an assumed risk.
What type of injunction is this? o Conditional.
|