Medford v. Levy
| Decision Date | 08 December 1888 |
| Parties | MEDFORD et ux. v. LEVY et ux. |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
Submitted June 14, 1888.
Syllabus by the Court.
While the doing of certain acts by a person in the use of his premises as a dwelling-house might not in themselves amount to a private nuisance, yet when the same acts are done wantonly and maliciously, for the mere purpose of annoying his neighbor, and to destroy the peace and quiet of his home and they have such effect, they may amount to a nuisance which a court of equity will restrain. [1]
Where two families are occupying rooms in the same house, using in common the halls and stairways, a court of equity will not restrain the one from committing a nuisance against the other, unless the proof of the existence of such nuisance is clear and strong. A court of equity will, as far as it can discourage a resort to its aid for the purpose of interfering in mere domestic broils.
He who comes into a court of equity must come in with clean hands therefore when there appears to be an unfortunate quarrel between two women, which involves the families of each, and both are in fault, a court of equity will not interfere to protect one against the other, and enjoin as a nuisance what one does against the other.
Appeal from circuit court, Cabell county.
Bill filed by Thomas Medford and wife to restrain Joseph Levy and wife from a system of conduct by which they were alleged to be endeavoring to destroy the peace and comfort of plaintiffs' home. The injunction granted was perpetuated with costs, and defendants appeal.
Gibson & Michie, for appellants.
Simms & Enslow, for appellees.
JOHNSON P.
This is a bill of injunction to restrain a private nuisance. The plaintiffs in February, 1887, presented their bill, in vacation, to the judge of the circuit court of Cabell county in which Thomas Medford alleged that he is the owner in fee of a three-story brick and stone building in the city of Huntington; that the lower story is used as a business room, and the second story for dwelling purposes, and the third has not been used for any special purpose; that on or about the 1st day of November, 1885, the plaintiff, who had occupied the first floor with a stock of queensware, determined to sell or rent the same; that on the 20th of that month he rented Joseph Levy the store and three rooms on the second floor for a dwelling for one year, with the privilege of three years; that he has been occupying the second floor of said building since 1884, and there is a front and rear stairway leading to the second floor, and a large hall at the top of the stairways; that himself and wife, a little girl, and a house-girl occupy a portion of the said second-story rooms, and the said defendants occupy the others; the stairs and hall are used in common; the front room on the east side is used by the plaintiff as a parlor, and three rooms adjoining, on the same side, are used by them as bedrooms, and they use a building in the rear of the main building as kitchen and dining-room; that defendants use a room in front, on the west side of the building, as a parlor, and two rooms,--one in the rear, on the west side, as a bedroom, and the other rear room on said floor as a kitchen and dining-room,--which last rooms were constructed with two sets of doors, to keep offensive smells from the kitchen from the other part of the house, and also a partition and door across the hallway to assist in avoiding smells from the kitchen; that when said doors of the kitchen and hall are kept properly closed, no offensive smells can pass from the kitchen on the second floor into the rooms in front, but all such offensive odors pass out the corridor in the kitchen; that plaintiff's wife had been a great sufferer from neuralgia, is in feeble health, and very nervous and excitable, and is now and almost constantly subject to severe attacks of neuralgia, and any unusual noise or confusion produces upon her severe nervous attacks, which require the continual care and attention of the doctor to alleviate her suffering; that during the past two months the defendants have maliciously and willfully inaugurated a system of conduct, in the use of their rooms, for the avowed purpose and object of driving the plaintiff from the rooms which he and his family occupy, and make living in them impossible; and the defendants threaten to continue their willful and malicious annoyance, and make the living in said rooms so disagreeable and uncomfortable that, to preserve their health and comfort, they will have to abandon their dwelling-rooms aforesaid, unless defendants are restrained from continuing their malicious and offensive conduct and doings, which are unnecessary and uncalled for in domestic life. The bill then proceeds to specify the offensive conduct, among them impolite hailing of Mrs. Medford by Mrs. Levy, as, "Good-bye, Sal!" "Hello, Sal!" "Chestnut!" and like sayings; that such remarks are made and persisted in for the purpose of annoying, exciting, and maligning the wife of plaintiff, and without any provocation on the part of Mrs. Medford, and that she is thereby annoyed and excited to such an extent as to interfere with their enjoyment of their rooms; that defendants, while their meals are being prepared, instead of keeping the doors closed, and allowing the kitchen odors to escape into the outside air,--an arrangement which is amply provided for in the construction of the house,--throw open the doors leading from the kitchen to the hall, and filling the whole house with objectionable odors, owing to the frequent cooking of cabbage, onions, and other things, the odor of which is particularly nauseating to the wife of plaintiff in her present enfeebled and excited condition, and has the effect of making her sick, and rendering her said rooms unfit for the reception of company, and in many other ways interfering with her free and perfect enjoyment of her said rooms, and that the said defendants, although knowing that this can be avoided, persist in these things, for the purpose of annoying plaintiff and his wife; that said defendants are in the habit of throwing old boots and shoes and socks and other objectionable things into the yard, sweeping dirt out of the rooms which defendants occupy into the halls and stairways, and allowing it to remain there a long time, cleaning shoes, shaking clothes, carpets, and rugs in the hall, thereby filling it with dust, and the floors with dirt, which they do not sweep up and carry away, but allow it to remain, thereby adding to the dirt already accumulated; that all these things are very disagreeable, annoying, and insufferable to your said plaintiff, and especially to his wife, whose habits are those of a neat and tidy housewife, and that they are a matter of great embarrassment to her in the presence of visitors; disagreeable smells make plaintiff's wife nervous, bring on attacks of neuralgia, and thereby affect her health, and thereby destroy the peace and comfort of plaintiffs' home; that all these acts are wholly unnecessary on the part of the defendants, but that they persist in them on account of their untidy habits, of which plaintiff and his wife were both ignorant before renting the property to said Levy, and also for the purpose of annoying plaintiff and his wife, of making their rooms as uncomfortable as possible, and of causing them finally to vacate the rooms, which they will be compelled to do unless the defendants are restrained; that instead of passing through the halls quietly, and not making any more noise than necessary, the defendants engage in loud talking, singing, and whistling, stamping, and dancing in the halls and rooms; that they make excessive and unnecessary noise with coal-buckets, and by slamming doors; that these noises are not made from any necessity, or even thoughtlessly, but for the express purpose of exciting, annoying, and vexing and reviling the plaintiff and wife, and, owing to her nervous organization and feeble health, they do annoy, excite, and vex plaintiff's wife, and at times completely prostrate her with nervous attacks, and impair her peace of mind, and completely unfit her for her duties, and interfere with plaintiffs' enjoyment of domestic life; that they have thrown dirty water out of the windows, purposely spilled water on the stairs, and leaving it there, annoying the plaintiff and his wife, and damaging his property; that they are in the habit of leaving doors open when they ought to be closed, and closing them when they ought to be open, wiping their feet on the newspaper of plaintiff left at the door, sweeping dirt under doors, and throwing it through transoms over which they have no control, and thereby excessively annoying and irritating plaintiff and his wife, and seriously inter fering with their happiness, and the perfect enjoyment and comfort of their home. The prayer of the bill is that defendants, etc., be enjoined "from doing the acts above mentioned and enumerated, or any one or more of them, or from doing anything else done for the purpose of annoying, exasperating, or reviling your said complainants, or either of them, or in any other manner calculated to disturb them in the full and perfect and quiet enjoyment and comfort of their said home," etc. The injunction was granted in vacation, and was as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial