Case brief summary
Normally, if a court finds a nuisance (an activity that unreasonably harms neighboring property) causing real harm, it must order the activity stopped with an injunction.
Facts
A large cement plant near Albany released dirt, smoke, and vibration that damaged nearby landowners' properties, and a trial found this was a nuisance.
Procedural history
The trial court found a nuisance and awarded money damages for past harm but refused to order the plant to stop operating, and the mid-level appeals court agreed.
Issue
When a factory's pollution is a proven nuisance but shutting it down would cause far greater economic loss than the harm to neighbors, should courts still automatically order it closed?
Holding
The court reversed and sent the case back with instructions to issue an injunction (an order to stop the nuisance) that would be lifted if the company instead paid permanent money damages covering all past and future harm.
Reasoning
Shutting down the plant and its 300 jobs seemed too harsh, so the court let the company keep running by paying permanent damages, like buying the right to continue.
Opinions
Majority (Bergan): Allowed the plant to keep operating if it pays permanent damages to the neighbors instead of being forced to shut down immediately.
Concurrences (Fuld, Burke, Scileppi): These judges joined the majority opinion without writing separately.
Dissent (Jasen): Would have ordered an injunction effective in 18 months unless the pollution was fixed, rejecting permanent payments for a private company's ongoing harm.