Toyo Tire N. Am. Mfg. Inc. v. Davis

The plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to survive the defendant's motion for summary judgment in their lawsuit asserting claims for trespass, continuing trespass and nuisance arising out of the defendant's operation of a tire manufacturing facility in close proximity to their home.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Toyo Tire North America Manufacturing Inc. operates a large tire manufacturing and distribution facility about 625 feet from the home of Lynn and Duron Davis. The Davises sued Toyo Tire, alleging that its facility is a nuisance and has resulted in a trespass, causing them discomfort and annoyance and diminishing their property’s value. The trial court denied Toyo Tire’s motion for summary judgment; the Court of Appeals affirmed that order; and we granted certiorari to address two issues.

First, we consider Toyo Tire’s argument that the Davises presented insufficient evidence, at the summary judgment stage of the case, to show that the decrease in their property value was proximately caused by the alleged nuisance and trespass. Applying the standards used in reviewing summary judgment motions, we reject this argument. Second, we consider Toyo Tire’s argument that even if the Davises can establish causation, they cannot recover damages both for their discomfort and annoyance and for the diminution in their property value, because that would constitute an impermissible double recovery. Following a long line of this Court’s precedents as well as several cases from the Court of Appeals except one case that we disapprove, we conclude that the past discomfort and annoyance caused by a continuing nuisance and the diminution in the property’s market value resulting from the expectation of continuing discomfort and annoyance constitute two separate injuries, and the Davises, who both occupy and own the property, may potentially recover damages for both injuries. Accordingly, we affirm.

Toyo Tire N. Am. Mfg. Inc. v. Davis

The plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to survive the defendant's motion for summary judgment in their lawsuit asserting claims for trespass, continuing trespass and nuisance arising out of the defendant's operation of a tire manufacturing facility in close proximity to their home.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report