Price v. Grantz

Citations

• 118 Pa. 402
• 11 A. 794
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 404

Syllabus

<p>1. When, in an action against defendants operating aleadworks and shot-tower, the plaintiff has declared as for a public nuisance with an averment of special damage, and the plea is the general issue, he must show that in operating their works the defendants were maintaining a common nuisance — inconvenient and troublesome to the community — and that he suffered a special or peculiar injury therefrom.</p> <p>2. Where there is evidence from which the jury might find that an injury from lead-poisoning was suffered by but a single individual and because of an exceptional susceptibility to such influences, while the traces of noxious emission were so slight as not to affect others, such injury would not be sufficient to sustain an averment that the leadworks was a common or public nuisance.</p> <p>3. When the defendants were engaged in a lawful business, in order to sustain an action for an injury resulting therefrom, the injury must be shown to have been real and substantial, not a trifling annoyance or injury such as is necessarily incident to the business complained of.</p>