Forgot password?
A law blog by Robert Lombardo on The Whole 9

Attorney Robert Lombardo came from the creative world and then began practicing law in 1995. The diversity of his professional life (years of which were spent in Europe, Australia and Japan) gives him a unique perspective on the law. Currently Robert is focusing on entertainment law (which encompasses nearly all creative industries) and brings this firsthand experience and desire to make the law accessible to the The Whole 9 community.

View Robert Lombardo’s Portfolio

Is This a Nuisance?

January 26, 2010
3 Comments (see all)

Elin owns a mansion on a lake in Florida.  Her long time neighbor, Rachael, owns a more modest home just behind Elin’s and can see the lake from her bedroom.

Elin and Rachael recently got into an argument over a guy they both fancied – or something like that – and are no longer friends.

Elin knew that Rachael did a lot of entertaining in her bedroom; so Elin had huge spotlights erected on her property that go on automatically every night at sunset and turn off at sunrise.  This has the desired effect – Rachael no longer has a view of the lake from her bedroom at night.

Rachael sues Elin.

You are the judge.

Will Rachael prevail?

 

Any Resemblance to Actual Events or Persons Living or Dead is Purely Coincidental.

Answer below in comments later today.

Leave a comment
3 comments (see all)
RSS Feed

  1. awaken2sun

    What is Rachael suing Elin for? To have the lights removed? Turned off? Some sort of monetary damages? If I was the judge and Elin couldn’t prove that the lights in that position were accomplishing something (protecting her property) that couldn’t be accomplished by another means, I would order that she move them.

  2. celestevoce

    Sounds like a bad neighbor (don’t we all have them), but I don’t know how much of a case there is if there are no homeowners’ association rules over their properties.

  3. biko

    A nuisance exists if:

    Elin’s use of her land unreasonably interfers with the use and enjoyment of Rachael’s land.

    Elin could claim (untruthfully) that the spotlights are needed to protect her property at night but the court would balance that with the degree of harm done. Some of the factors the court would take into consideration: locality and character of the neighborhood; the nature, extent, and frequency of the interference, and the utility and social value of the spotlights.

    But everybody (including the judge) knows that Elin hates Rachael – and no burglar would mess with Elin.

    So Rachael should prevail on a nuisance theory.

    Elin intentionally caused substantial and unreasonable interference with Rachael’s use and enjoyment of her property by putting up spotlights that are on all night and, thus, ruin Rachael’s view of the lake.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Click here to login or join.