This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P made the mistake of building a house next to D. At the time of its completion plaintiffs had an unobstructed view of the neighboring hills, the territory which formerly comprised the suburban town of Hollywood, and vast stretches of the metropolitan area. D engaged in the destruction of P’s plants and flowers, marring walls and windows with paint, screaming epithets at Ps, screaming at Ps’ guests, moving their trash can so that it sat under Ps dining room window, constructing a wall to block sunlight and Ps’ view, interfering with Ps’ attempt to sell their home, and planting eucalyptus trees to further block the view and threaten the foundation of Ps’ home through extensive root growth. P sued Ds for nuisance. Ds attempted to minimize the significance of each of their several acts with a view of demonstrating that no damage could have been suffered by Ps. They claimed that none of the acts standing alone could constitute a nuisance nor would they ever amount to $1000 in damages. The court found for P and awarded $1000 in damages. Ds appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.