Legal Opinion

City of Milwaukee v. Milbrew, Inc.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1942PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed April 7, 1942:

Fairchild, J.

Whether a nuisance exists and what remedies are provided for dealing with an existing nuisance raise questions which involve technical propositions of law and matters of public policy. It was said in Gilbert v. Showerman (1871), 23 Mich. 448, 456, a suit seeking to enjoin the operation of a mill as a private nuisance, that: “We cannot shut our eyes to the obvious truth that if the running of this mill can be enjoined, almost any manufactory in any of our cities can be enjoined upon similar reasons. Some resident must be incommoded or…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Dobbins v. Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  2. Yates v. MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
  3. Gilbert v. ShowermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Ogden v. City of MadisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  5. State ex rel. City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Boden v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  2. City of Festus v. WernerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. State v. Quality Egg Farm, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Donley v. BoettcherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Chemsol, LLC v. City of SibleyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2019

2 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