Mikol v. Vlahopoulos

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, in a trespass case, where two measures of damages are available and the plaintiff presents evidence of one, “it is up to the defendant, who has the burden of showing a reduction in damages, to show that the other measure would be less”
• nuisance considered permanent if it ‘will remain even though the cause has been abated’
• nuisance considered permanent if it “will remain even though the cause has been abated”
• “[Wjhere these two measures of damage are possible, and the plaintiff gives evidence as to one of them, it is up to the defendant, who has the burden of showing a reduction in damages, to show that the other measure would be less.”
• diminution in value is ceiling for recoverable restoration costs
• when a plaintiff may prove damage to property either by loss of value or cost of restoration, and gives evidence as to one measure, it is up to the defendant, who has the burden of showing mitigation and reduction, to show that the other measure would be less

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Gross v. Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Co.
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1985-01-09· cited 96×
• Weld County Bd. of County Com'rs v. Slovek
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1986-08-25· cited 81×
• Santa Fe Partnership v. ARCO Products Co.
  California Court of Appeal· 1996-06-20· cited 40×
• Jowdy v. Guerin
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1969-08-11· cited 22×
• Dixon v. City of Phoenix
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1992-06-16· cited 20×
• Mel Foster Co. Properties v. American Oil Co.
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1988-07-20· cited 18×
• Kruvant v. Dickerman
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1973-06-01· cited 18×
• Blanton & Company v. Transamerica Title Ins. Co.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1975-06-23· cited 9×
• Dado v. Jeeninga
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2001-01-24· cited 9×
• Micuda v. McDonald (In Re Evergreen Ventures)
  D. Arizona· 1992-11-24· cited 4×
• Johansen v. Combustion Engineering, Inc.
  S.D. Georgia· 1993-06-04· cited 2×
• FOUNDERS BANK OF ARIZONA v. Chrysler Realty Corp.
  D. Arizona· 2000-03-02
• Joseph Kornbleuth, DMD v. Thomas Westover (081898)(Camden County & Statewide)
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2020-03-11
• Camacho v. L & T International Corp.
  Sup. Ct. of the Comm. of the N. Mariana Islands· 1996-02-09

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Herzog v. Grosso
  California Supreme Court· 1953-07-07· cited 58×
• Belkus v. City of Brockton
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1933-03-08· cited 52×
• Langley v. Deshazer
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1956-12-11· cited 10×