Trickett v. Ochs
Vermont Supreme Court
838 A.2d 66 (2003)
- Written by Sara Rhee, JD
Facts
The defendants were in the business of growing and selling apples from their apple orchard. The orchard included a residence used as a homestead and a farmhouse used to store the apples. In 1992, the defendants sold the residence to the plaintiffs. The residence was located immediately across the road from the barn. At the time of purchase, the defendants’ use of the barn did not bother the plaintiffs because the defendants immediately shipped the apples out of the barn. However, in the mid-1990s, the defendants began waxing and storing the apples on-site in refrigerated tractor trailer trucks. In the winter, tractor trailer trucks arrived at the barn before dawn and throughout the day to pick up the apples. This new activity resulted in increased noise and light glare at the plaintiff’s residence. In August 1997, the plaintiffs complained to the zoning administrator, but these complaints were dismissed. In November 2000, the plaintiffs filed a nuisance suit against the defendants seeking an injunction and damages. The superior court found that the jurisdiction’s right-to-farm law barred the plaintiff’s suit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lockwood, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 826,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 992 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.
