From our private database of 22,600+ case briefs...
Parish of East Feliciana v. Guidry
Louisiana Court of Appeal
923 So. 2d 45 (2005)
Facts
Jeremy and Amber Guidry (defendants) built a motocross track on their rural property for recreational use. Approximately one year later, the Guidrys built a larger track and began operating it as a commercial motocross enterprise. Motorcycles would practice and race at the track, sometimes dozens of them at a time, most days from the morning until dark. The parish of East Feliciana (plaintiff) received many complaints from the Guidrys’ neighbors (plaintiffs) about the incredible noise and pervasive dust that the motocross track caused in the area. The parish eventually filed a petition for a preliminary and permanent injunction to stop the Guidrys from operating the commercial track, alleging that its operation violated the parish’s noise and nuisance ordinances. Numerous neighbors joined the parish’s suit as intervenors, also seeking to enjoin the operation of the track as a nuisance. The trial court granted the preliminary injunction, and the case went to trial. At trial, the evidence showed that the noise generated by the motorcycles at the track was almost constant, very loud, and incredibly irritating to the Guidrys’ neighbors. The trial court granted the permanent injunction, and the Guidrys appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McClendon, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Guidry, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 519,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,600 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
