Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2015–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Adams v. Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co.green1 sentence2015To support a private nuisance claim, the plaintiff must show: (a) [he] has property rights and privileges in respect to the use or enjoyment interfered with, (b) the invasion results in significant harm (c) [defendant’s] conduct is the legal cause of the invasion, and (d) the invasion is either (i) intentional and unreasonable, or (ii) unintentional and otherwise actionable under the rules governing liability for negligent, reckless, or ultrahazardous conduct. [Capitol Props Group, LLC v 1247 Ctr Street, LLC, 283 Mich App 422, 431-432 ; 770 NW2d 105 (2009).] Recovery for nuisance is appropriat | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Capitol Properties Group, LLC v. 1247 Center Street, LLC
green
2 sentences2024First, to prove the private nuisance claim in Count I, plaintiff must show: (a) the other has property rights and privileges in respect to the use or enjoyment interfered with, (b) the invasion results in significant harm, (c) the actor’s conduct is the legal cause of the invasion, and (d) the invasion is either (i) intentional and unreasonable, or (ii) unintentional and otherwise actionable under the rules governing liability for negligent, reckless, or ultrahazardous conduct. [Capitol Props Group, LLC v 1247 Ctr Street, LLC, 283 Mich App 422, 431-432 ; 770 NW2d 105 (2009).] “To prevail in nu 2024First, to prove the private nuisance claim in Count I, plaintiff must show: (a) the other has property rights and privileges in respect to the use or enjoyment interfered with, (b) the invasion results in significant harm, (c) the actor’s conduct is the legal cause of the invasion, and (d) the invasion is either (i) intentional and unreasonable, or (ii) unintentional and otherwise actionable under the rules governing liability for negligent, reckless, or ultrahazardous conduct. [Capitol Props Group, LLC v 1247 Ctr Street, LLC, 283 Mich App 422, 431-432 ; 770 NW2d 105 (2009).] “To prevail in nu | 3 | 2015–2024 |
Adkins v. Thomas Solvent Co.
green
2 sentences2024It involves “not only a defect, but threatening or impending danger . . . to the property rights or health of persons sustaining peculiar relations to the same . . ..” [Adkins v Thomas Solvent Co, 440 Mich 293, 302-303 ; 487 NW2d 715 (1992) (citations omitted; ellipses in original).] In Adkins, the Court provided the following elements for a private nuisance claim: According to the Restatement, an actor is subject to liability for private nuisance for a nontrespassory invasion of another’s interest in the private use and -10- enjoyment of land if (a) the other has property rights and privilege 2024It involves “not only a defect, but threatening or impending danger . . . to the property rights or health of persons sustaining peculiar relations to the same . . ..” [Adkins v Thomas Solvent Co, 440 Mich 293, 302-303 ; 487 NW2d 715 (1992) (citations omitted; ellipses in original).] In Adkins, the Court provided the following elements for a private nuisance claim: According to the Restatement, an actor is subject to liability for private nuisance for a nontrespassory invasion of another’s interest in the private use and -10- enjoyment of land if (a) the other has property rights and privilege | 2 | 2017–2024 |
City of Jackson v. Thompson-McCully Co.
green
2 sentences2024First, to prove the private nuisance claim in Count I, plaintiff must show: (a) the other has property rights and privileges in respect to the use or enjoyment interfered with, (b) the invasion results in significant harm, (c) the actor’s conduct is the legal cause of the invasion, and (d) the invasion is either (i) intentional and unreasonable, or (ii) unintentional and otherwise actionable under the rules governing liability for negligent, reckless, or ultrahazardous conduct. [Capitol Props Group, LLC v 1247 Ctr Street, LLC, 283 Mich App 422, 431-432 ; 770 NW2d 105 (2009).] “To prevail in nu 2024First, to prove the private nuisance claim in Count I, plaintiff must show: (a) the other has property rights and privileges in respect to the use or enjoyment interfered with, (b) the invasion results in significant harm, (c) the actor’s conduct is the legal cause of the invasion, and (d) the invasion is either (i) intentional and unreasonable, or (ii) unintentional and otherwise actionable under the rules governing liability for negligent, reckless, or ultrahazardous conduct. [Capitol Props Group, LLC v 1247 Ctr Street, LLC, 283 Mich App 422, 431-432 ; 770 NW2d 105 (2009).] “To prevail in nu | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Kincaid v. Cardwell
green
1 sentence2015Kincaid, 300 Mich App at 522 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.