Legal Opinion

Tushbant v. Greenfield's Inc.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1944No. Docket No. 61, Calendar No. 42,608PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiffs have established to some extent the existence of a private nuisance which can be sufficiently abated by defendant to minimize the resulting harm to plaintiffs' business. Plaintiffs are entitled to some relief. Mackenzie v. Frank M. Pauli Co.,207 Mich. 456 (6 A.L.R. 1305).

I cannot agree with Mr. Justice REID that this is entirely a public nuisance, and that the only remedy for the abatement thereof rests with the public (police) authorities.

"Injunction lies at the suit of a private person to restrain such an appropriation of the site of a street by another person, as leaves no mode…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Adams v. Kalamazoo Ice & Fuel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Mackenzie v. Frank M. Pauli Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Smith v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Pratt v. LewisMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Shamhart v. Morrison Cafeteria CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1947
  2. Wilson v. Cinemark Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API