Legal Opinion

Town of Jennings v. Pappenfuss

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 24, 1928No. 17936PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRiley, J.

Huida Pappenfuss brought this action below for an injunction to enjoin the plaintiff in error, defendant below, from maintaining a nuisance and to compel it to abate the same. She alleged that the overflow from a septic tank of the town sewer located upon her farm constituted a nuisance; that the town permitted the overflow upon her land and that the odor and stench was of such extent that it was practically impossible to live upon her farm; that repeated requests to the town officials to abate the same were unavailing, that said condition, was detrimental to plaintiff and endangered her…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Barnes v. LynchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1899
  2. Barnes v. LynchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1899
  3. Zahn v. ObertSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Lewis v. AllenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  5. Perry v. SnyderSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. A. A. Murphy, Inc. v. BanfieldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
  2. Sharp v. 251st Street Landfill, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1991
  3. Weaver v. BishopSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. Mead v. VincentSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
  5. Mattingly v. SislerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1946

1 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