Gustafson v. Cotco Enterprises, Inc.
Ohio Court of Appeals
42 Ohio App. 2d 45 (1974)

- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Gustafson (plaintiff) owned property in Berlin Township. Cotco Enterprises (defendant) purchased property nearby. Cotco’s plans to operate a drag strip for racing on the property became public. Cotco planned to have races each Sunday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., including approximately 280 time trials and races. Gustafson and other nearby landowners (plaintiffs) opposed the plan and made their opposition known to Cotco. Although Berlin Township did not have zoning regulations, the plaintiffs asserted that the operation of the drag strip would constitute a public nuisance. Cotco had made plans for a tall fence to reduce the impact of dust, fumes, dirt, and lighting on the landowners. However, the landowners continued to be concerned about the level of noise that would be generated at the drag strip. The landowners sued Cotco. The landowners presented testimony and evidence regarding the sound levels of funny cars, dragsters, and stock cars. The trial court entered an injunction against the construction and operation of the drag strip. Cotco appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lynch, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.