P purchased ten acres of undeveloped woods and constructed their 4000-square foot home, which included a veranda and an indoor swimming pool. Ps had a number of animals living on their property, including four horses, three dogs, a bird, and a rabbit. P's property was agricultural, and a number of farmers in the immediate area own livestock. In 2001, D purchased an operational hog farm for the purpose of opening a dairy and relocated his family from the Netherlands. D raises approximately 1500 milking cows and 100 dry cows and dairy calves. D began its milking operations on June 24, 2002. D is a regulated entity under the Indiana Department of Environmental Management's ('IDEM') Confined Feeding Operation ('CFO'). Following allegations by Ps that an employee of D had trespassed upon P's land D hired a licensed surveyor. The survey indicated that Ps were mistaken about the ownership of the grass strip and D owns the northern half of the grass strip. Ps filed suit seeking to enjoin the dairy from further operation and for compensation for nuisance, negligence, trespass, criminal mischief, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. D filed a motion for summary judgment, and the court issued an order granting summary judgment; the Right to Farm Act was constitutional, and it barred Ps’ nuisance action. Ps appealed.

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

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.