BA621-L10A3 - Peter A. Taylor February 1, 2010 May 21, 2010...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Peter A. Taylor February 1, 2010 – May 21, 2010 BA621 Business Law Lesson #10 Assignment #3 Case 21-1 Summary: Boomer et al. v. Atlantic Cement Company This case (pages 607-608 of your text) demonstrates why the tort of nuisance is ineffective as a means of controlling pollution. Plaintiffs in this case brought an action against the defendant. They sought an injunction against the defendant due to the considerable amount of dirt and smoke the cement plant created. The plaintiffs won the case, but they did not get the injunction. Instead, the court ruled that the appropriate remedy in the nuisance case was that the cement company would have to give the plaintiffs permanent damages. The court decided that permanent damages are allowed where the loss recoverable would obviously be small compared with the cost of removal of the nuisance. Thus, it seemed fair to the court to give the plaintiffs permanent damages. In Case 21-1, the New York Court of Appeals became the third court to
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/06/2010 for the course BA LMA01 taught by Professor Weinstein during the Spring '10 term at Antelope Valley College.

Page1 / 3

BA621-L10A3 - Peter A. Taylor February 1, 2010 May 21, 2010...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online