Evans v. Reading Chemical Fertilizing Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Evans v. Reading Chemical Fertilizing Co., 160 Pa. 209 (Pa. 1894)
28 A. 702; 1894 Pa. LEXIS 797
Fell, Green, McCollum, Stebrett, Williams

Evans v. Reading Chemical Fertilizing Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

We have examined the record with special reference to the specifications of error, and are not satisfied that either of them should be sustained. The findings of the material facts were fully warranted by the evidence; and they are quite sufficient to support the decree “ perpetually restraining the said defendants, their workmen, agents, employees, successors and assigns from carrying on the manufacture and business as in said bill described,” etc. If, as was suggested on argument, the defendant has since adopted new and improved methods of conducting its business, whereby the nuisance complained of has been abated, the court below will see that the parties are both protected in their respective rights. The injunction prohibits carrying on the manufacture and business “ as in said bill described.”

For reasons given at length in the report of the learned master and court below, we think the decree should be affirmed.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant.

Reference

Full Case Name
Evans v. Reading Chemical Fertilizing Co., Ltd.
Cited By
50 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Nuisance — Injunction—Bone-boiling establishment. An injunction will be awarded restraining the operation of an establishment for the manufacture of fertilizers out of the carcasses of dead animals and butchers’ refuse, where the evidence shows that the establishment was in a populous neighborhood, and that the gases which it gave off caused nausea, vomiting and loss of appetite, and rendered plaintiff’s house undesirable as a place of residence, and depreciated its market value.