nuisance
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 272 U.S. 365 - Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co · 1926Most cited · 5,588 citing opinions
the question whether the power exists to forbid the erection of a building of a particular kind or for a particular use, like the question whether a particular thing is a nuisance, is to be determined, not by an abstract consideration of the building or of the thing considered apart, but by considering it in connection with the circumstances and the locality. A nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place, like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard.
How the Supreme Court has restated “nuisance”
Each Supreme Court definition of “nuisance,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “nuisance”
Court decisions citing the 4 opinions that defined “nuisance” — 6,250 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 4 definitions, chronological · 1862–1926
- ORIGINAL
If the owner of real estate suffer a nuisance to be created, or continued, by another on or adjacent to his premises, in a prosecution of a business for his benefit, when he has the power to prevent or abate the nuisance, he is liable for an injury resulting therefrom the third persons.
owner liability despite independent contractor
the rule is that if the abridgment of the right of passage occasioned by the erection was for a public purpose and produced a public benefit, and if the erection was in a reasonable situation, and a reasonable space was left for the passage of vessels on the river, then it is not an unreasonable obstruction and indictable.
obstruction to navigation
the mere declaration by the city council of Milwaukee that a certain structure was an encroachment or obstruction did not make it so, nor could such declaration make it a nuisance unless it in fact had that character