Wernke v. Halas
Court of Appeals of Indiana
600 N.E.2d 117 (1992)
- Written by Eric Cervone, LLM
Facts
John and Karen Halas (plaintiffs) lived next door to Roland Wernke (defendant). Wernke decided to build a privacy fence, which was under six feet tall, between his property and the Halases’ property. To cover holes in the fence, Wernke attached vinyl strips and a license plate on the Halases’ side of the fence. Wernke also attached a section of orange-plastic construction fencing on the Halases’ side of the fence. In addition, Wernke placed support posts in concrete along the fence line. While the concrete was still wet, vandals scrawled obscenities into the concrete. No part of the concrete, the post, or the fence encroached upon the Halases’ property. Later, Wernke set up a toilet seat, mounting it to a piece of plywood placed on a post overlooking the Halases’ property. Like the fence, the toilet was entirely on Wernke’s property. The Halases sued Wernke, alleging that the toilet, the fence, and the graffiti constituted nuisances. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Halases, holding that each of the items was an illegal nuisance. Wernke appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Baker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
