Legal Opinion

Banford v. Aldrich Chem. Co., Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 2010No. 2009-0305PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 1} We must determine whether a plaintiff must present evidence of physical discomfort to recover damages for annoyance and discomfort in a nuisance claim. In addition, we must determine whether the trial court properly limited evidence at trial regarding plaintiffs’ fears and concerns about future harm.

{¶ 2} This case involved a trial on proximate cause and damages only, resulting from the evacuation of residents within a one-mile radius of a factory following an explosion. The defendant did not contest liability, and the court granted judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the existence…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Paugh v. HanksOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Krischbaum v. DillonOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Taylor v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Renfro v. BlackOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State ex rel. Sartini v. YostOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Tammy Rosebrough v. Buckeye Valley High SchoolCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  2. Brown v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
  3. Brown v. Whirlpool Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2014
  4. State ex rel. Food & Water Watch v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Little Hocking Water Ass'n v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2015

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

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

Powered by the Exa API