Prah v. Maretti
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentWilliam G. Callow, J.
The majority has adopted the Restatement’s reasonable use doctrine to grant an owner of a solar heated home a cause of action against his neighbor who, in acting entirely within the applicable ordinances and statutes, seeks to design and build his home in such a location that it may, at various times during the day, shade the plaintiff’s solar collector, thereby impeding the efficiency of his heating system1 during several months of the year. Because I believe the facts of this case clearly reveal that a cause of action for private nuisance will not lie, I dissent.
The majority arrives at its…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. CausbySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Just v. Marinette CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
- Venuto v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1971
- Holifield v. Setco Industries, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.