The purpose of this paper is to look closely at the theoretical underpinnings of public nuisance doctrine. Public nuisance lawsuits have been brought against gun manufacturers for gun-related murders in cities, and more recently against paint manufacturers for the costs of removing lead paint from homes. State attorneys general have latched on to public nuisance doctrine as a handy tool for public interest litigation. Over this background comes a new set of challenges for public nuisance doctrine. ![]() ![]() The case law on public nuisance that is taught in law schools is scant, and what is provided is almost totally void of any theoretical justification beyond the circular pronouncements of the courts. In comparison, public nuisance law remains an unexplored area from the perspective of theorists. 1 The theoretical underpinnings of private nuisance law are difficult enough to explain, and there has been little effort in the literature to explore them in depth. A public nuisance is an intentional and unreasonable interference with rights that are common to the public.Ĭommentators have described nuisance law as an impenetrable jungle, and have suggested that private and public nuisance law be given different labels to avoid the tendency to view them as equivalent legal doctrines. A private nuisance is an intentional and unreasonable interference with the quiet use and enjoyment of property. Tort law distinguishes between private and public nuisances.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |