Legal Opinion

Damadio v. Levinsohn

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided July 13, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The above-stated causes were by consent of counsel for the respective parties heard and argued together. The nuisance which complainants allege the defendants are responsible for the creation and maintenance of is attributable to noise and vibration. Whatever grounds of complaint the complainants may consider they have in such respect may only be chargeable, on the proofs herein, against the defendant Stetson Shirt Company. Complainants' allegations of nuisance are not substantiated by such satisfactory proof as to warrant the court to grant the relief of injunction, and assessment of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Citizens Coach Co. v. Camden Horse RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1878
  2. Gilbough v. West Side Amusement Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1902
  3. Hennessy v. CarmonyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1892
  4. Kroecker v. Camden Coke Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1913
  5. Reilley v. CurleyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1908

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kubby v. HammondArizona Supreme Court · 1948
  2. State v. New York Central Railroad Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
  3. State v. HollandNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
  4. Lyndhurst v. United Cork Cos.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  5. Sans v. RAMSEY GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API