Banford v. Aldrich Chem. Co., Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPfeifer, J.
{¶ 42} The most salient issue in the case before us is that the defendant-appellant, Aldrich Chemical Company, Inc., did not contest liability as to nuisance. The majority underemphasizes that fact. In admitting nuisance, Aldrich admits “the wrongful invasion of the use and enjoyment of property, [and] also the wrongful invasion of personal legal rights and privileges generally.” Taylor v. Cincinnati (1944), 143 Ohio St. 426, 432, 28 O.O. 369, 55 N.E.2d 724. It has admitted that it has caused “material and substantial” injury. Eller v. Koehler (1903), 68 Ohio St. 51, 55, 67 N.E. 89. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Taylor v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1944
- Eller v. KoehlerOhio Supreme Court · 1903
- Banford v. Aldrich Chemical Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008