Hobbs v. Smith
Colorado Supreme Court
177 Colo. 299, 493 P.2d 1352 (1972)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Arlene Hobbs (defendant) lived in a residential zone of Jefferson County. The zoning ordinance allowed residents to keep up to two horses. Hobbs kept one or two horses in the backyard of her home and acted reasonably in the maintenance of the horses, including complying with relevant health regulations. Nevertheless, the horses attracted flies to the area and created noxious odors. P. Smith and other parties whose properties adjoined Hobbs’s property (plaintiffs) sued Hobbs, alleging nuisance and seeking to enjoin the keeping of horses on Hobbs’s property. The trial court found that Hobbs was allowed by the zoning ordinance to keep the horses and that Hobbs had acted reasonably in doing so but that the horses on Hobbs’s property substantially interfered with the adjoining property owners’ use and enjoyment of their property. The court found a nuisance per accidens and granted an injunction prohibiting the keeping of horses on Hobbs’s property. The court of appeals affirmed. The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed the matter. Hobbs argued that the trial court had no authority to enjoin an activity that was permitted under the relevant zoning ordinance.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hodges, J.)
Dissent (Day, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
