Search results
Brief Fact Summary. For thirty years, a maker of confections conducted business in a property that use two large mortars that made a substantial amount of noise when operating. A physician, who previously had a garden in the area directly behind the mortar, decided to convert the garden into a consultation room.
- Hunt V. State
Citation69 A.3d 360 (Del. 2013) Brief Fact Summary....
- Stockett V. Tolin
Citation791 F. Supp. 1536 (S. D. Fla. 1992) Brief Fact...
- Hunt V. State
The bill charges that the State of West Virginia is wrongly in possession of and exercising jurisdiction over a large part of the territory rightfully belonging to Maryland; that the true line of the western boundary of Maryland is a meridian running south to the first or most distant fountain of the Potomac River, and that such true line is ...
- Facts
- Issues
- Decision/Outcome
The claimant, a doctor, moved house and on the premises, he bought and built a shed in his garden to carry out his private practice within. His shed was on the boundary of the property and happened to be next door to a confectioner. The confectioner had produced sweets in his kitchen for many years before the doctor had moved in. The doctor alleged...
Whether the doctor could claim loss of amenity when he had ‘moved to the nuisance’ or not. Whether the character of the area or locality as a residential area meant that there was a nuisance.
There was a nuisance, and the fact that the doctor had ‘moved to the nuisance’ was no defence to the nuisance itself. Nor was there an easement acquired by the confectioner through long usage that entitled him to continue with his actions. What constitutes a nuisance was to be decided on a case to case basis, and it is necessary to consider the par...
Facts. The defendant was a confectioner whose premises neighboured the claimant’s home. The defendant used a noisy pestle and mortar from around 10am to around 1pm each day.
This conclusion gives to Maryland a uniform southern boundary along Virginia and West Virginia at low water mark on the south bank of the Potomac River to the intersection of the north and south line between Maryland and West Virginia, established by the decree in this case.
Bridgman Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained. Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks...
- 2 min
- 3.2K
- Quimbee
West Virginia. Argued: November 2, 3, 4, 1909. --- Decided: February 21, 1910. Messrs. Edward H. sincell, Isaac Lobe straus, and William H. Rawls for complainant. [Argument of Counsel from pages 2-12 intentionally omitted] Messrs. George E. Price and William G. Conley for defendant.
