Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 6-5-123 (2026)
Public Nuisances - Special Damage to Individual.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
If a public nuisance causes a special damage to an individual in which the public does not participate, such special damage gives a right of action.
(Code 1907, §5197; Code 1923, §9275; Code 1940, T. 7, §1086.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Russell Corp. v. Sullivan, 790 So. 2d 940 (Ala. 2001).
Russell Corp. v. Sullivan, 790 So. 2d 940 (Ala. 2001). “" Ala.Code 1975, § 6-5-123. In order to support an individual's cause of action for a public nuisance, the nuisance must cause a "special damage" that is different in "kind and degree from [the damage] suffered by the public in general.”
Funliner of Alabama, LLC v. Pickard, 873 So. 2d 198 (Ala. 2003). “2001), and § 6-5-123, Ala.Code 1975. The plaintiffs allege that they have lost money and that this loss is in addition to that suffered by the public generally.”
Hall v. North Montgomery Materials, LLC, 39 So. 3d 159 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). “” § 6-5-123, Ala. Code 1975. “A private nuisance may injure either the person or property, or both, and in either case a right of action accrues.”
United States v. Olin Corp., 606 F. Supp. 1301 (N.D. Ala. 1985). “” Ala.Code § 6-5-123 (1975). Note, however, that the right accrues only to an individual plaintiff who can show harm distinct in kind and degree from that suffered by the public in general.”
David C. Milton, Kelly O. Milton, Se. Land Grp., Inc., & Pinhoti Ridge Retreat, LLC v. Anthony D. Haywood & Sammy K. Gallman, individually & on behalf of the State of Alabama. (Appeal from Talladega Circuit Court: CV-23-900075) (Ala. 2023). “" § 6-5-123. The definitional difference between a public nuisance and a private nuisance is the identity of the damaged parties.”
Lee Cnty., Alabama Comm'n v. Creekwood Resources, LLC (M.D. Ala. 2022). “§ 6-5-123. None of these provisions appear to grant the County the right to bring a nuisance action.”
Ex parte Cardinal Health, Inc. PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (In re: DCH Health Care Auth. v. Purdue Pharma, L.P. & Fort Payne Hosp. Corp. v. McKesson Corp.) (Conecuh Circuit Court: CV-19-7 & CV-21-900016). (Ala. 2024). “" § 6-5-123, Ala. Code 1975. 3 SC-2023-0468 asked the Conecuh Circuit Court for permission to conduct additional fact discovery related to the costs associated with that newly disclosed "plan," but that request was denied.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.