Pl - Winget
Df - Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc
The plaintiffs home is located adjacent to a grocery supermarket
operated by the defendant Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
Pl alleges that the supermarket is a nuisance because of both (1) its
location and (2) the manner of its operation.
The Df has a lawful business located in an area zoned for retail
business and the zoning board determined that the area is
suitable for a grocery store.
Whether a grocery stores use of land is reasonable?
Whether such use constitutes a nuisance depends largely upon the facts?
[The fact that] one has been issued a license or permit to conduct a
business at a particular location cannot protect the licensee
who operates the business in such a manner as to constitute a
[The business] must not unreasonably interfere with the health or
comfort of neighbors or with their right to the enjoyment of
If a lawful business is operated in an
unlawful or unreasonable manner
so as to produce material injury or great annoyance
to others or unreasonably
interferes with the
lawful use and enjoyment
of their property, it will constitute a nuisance.
Not every annoyance or disturbance constitutes as a nuisance.
People who live in an organized community must suffer the inconvenience
and annoyance from their neighbors as long as it does not injury
their legal rights.
Question to Ask
You ask if there has been an injury to their legal rights.
The plaintiffs, among other things complain that (1) the store has
attracted crowds of people, and
many automobiles which caused
traffic and generally
disturbed the peace and quiet of
the community, and (2) trash trucks and street sweepers operated
on the premises at late night hours.
Response - crowds, car noise, fumes, traffic
It is a natural consequence and incident of the operation of the
supermarket that there will be an increase in the number of
people visiting the area.
Response Trash trucks and street sweepers
Not a basis for a finding of nuisance. It is no different that trash
collection at any other business.
Pl - other
Fans were permitted to blow on trees and shrubs that caused damage,
bright flood lights on until late at night, odors from
accumulating garbage, and trash permitted to escape onto Pl -
lot. (This was up for the trier of
facts to determine).
Response Trial judge refusal to allow other allegations.
The trial judge properly refused the Df - motion of a direct verdict.
[These] records give rise to a reasonable inference that such acts were
normal or necessary incidents of the operation of the business.
However, the acts have been discontinued and there is not grounds to
issues an injunction.
Reversed and remanded.