Case Conclusion Date: 03.22.2005
Practice Area: Land use and zoning
Outcome: Conf. settlement agreement reached
Description: This lawsuit was instituted by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff brought suit alleging private nuisance. Plaintiff complained of disturbance by Defendantâ€™s roostersâ€™ crowing. Plaintiff wanted to force Defendant to remove roosters from Defendantâ€™s property. Plaintiff proposed Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment Order to which Defendant objected, stating that Defendant is lawfully entitled to keeping roosters on Defendantâ€™s property. The subdivision where both Plaintiff and Defendant resided gave land owners a right to possess foul. Further, investigation undertaken on Defendantâ€™s part demonstrated that other neighboring residences to Plaintiffâ€™s property also contained roosters. From the evidentiary point of view this fact meant it would be difficult to prove whose roosters caused the alleged nuisance, because a neighboring rooster crowing could cause another rooster to crow making it impossible to prove the source of the alleged nuisance.