To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Clark v. Wambold

Citation. 160 N.W. 1039 (Wis. 1917)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here

Brief Fact Summary.

The Supreme Court of Wisconsin ruled that a property owner cannot, through the doctrine of nuisance, seek an injunction against a neighboring parcel for use of the property that is both lawful and reasonable.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A property owner, under the doctrine of nuisance, may not seek an injunction against a neighboring property where the neighbor is using the property both lawfully and reasonably. 


Wambold (Defendant) owned and operated a farm on his property next to Clark (Plaintiff). The Defendant has always kept pigs on his property and has always kept them in a pen bordering the Plaintiff’s property. The odors of the pig drift into the Plaintiff’s yard despite the Defendant reasonably keeping the pigs both clean and sanitary. The Plaintiff does not appreciate the smells coming from the Defendant’s property and seeks an injunction to remove the pigs from the Defendant’s property. The trial court ruled in favor of the Defendant and dismissed the injunction. Plaintiff appeals. 


Whether under a theory of nuisance, can a property owner seek an injunction to remove pigs that are reasonably clean and sanitary but may cause odors to drift to neighboring properties?


No. A property owner may not seek an injunction under the doctrine of nuisance, when the land is being used lawfully and reasonably. The court emphasizes that as long as the property owner is acting lawfully and reasonably on the property no nuisance can be determined. 

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following