Legal Opinion

Filson v. Crawford

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 24, 1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Action by Ella J. Eilson against George Crawford, and Philip Hauseman, to restrain a nuisance.

1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.

It is not necessary for the disposition of this case to decide whether a livery or boarding stable is or is not per se a nuisance. There can be no question that if such a stable is so kept and used as to destroy the comfort of persons occupying adjoining premises, and impair their value as places of habitation, it becomes an actionable nuisance. Dargan v. Waddell, 9 Ired. 244. In the present case I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has established by a fair preponderance of evidence that the defendants’ stable is a nuisance. Several witnesses testify that the noise caused by the stamping…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Francis v. . SchoellkopfNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. Chapman v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  3. Brady v. WeeksNew York Supreme Court · 1848
  4. Leonard v. . SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 1888

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Shimberg v. Risdon Creamery Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Oehler v. LevyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907
  3. In re ScroffordNew York Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Wallach v. Manhattan RailroadNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894

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

Powered by the Exa API