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).