Notable Items:
Appellant: Hugh K. and Jackie Evans
Appellee: Lochmere Recreation Club, Inc.
Venue: Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Issue(s) Before the Court:
Did the trial court err in granting defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
Appellant's Claim(s):
Plaintiff alleges that defendant "has used amplified sound from speakers aimed directly at [plaintiff's] premises."
"can be clearly heard in plaintiff's home even with all plaintiff's doors and windows closed and their television playing"
Appellee's Claim(s):
Holding(s) and Disposition:
Held: Yes. the trial court err in granting defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
Disposition: Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded for further proceedings on plaintiff's claim of private nuisance.
Material Facts:
- Instant civil action initiated in December 2004, alleging that each summer from May to September 1998-2004, LSTC operated their club in a manner to create a nuisance.
- Evans claim that the trial court erred in dismissing their claim.
- A full recounting of the facts is available below
Procedural History:
- In 1998, Lochmere Recreation Club, Inc. acquired the property from LSTC.
- Instant civil action initiated in December 2004, alleging that each summer from May to September 1998-2004, LSTC operated their club in a manner to create a nuisance.
- In January 2005, LSTC moved to dismiss.
- In April 2005, LSTC's motion to dismiss was granted.
- Evans's appealled.
Rationale
Majority Opinion
- In considering a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the trial court must determine whether the factual allegations in thje complaint state a claim for relief.
- Plaintiff must state the "substantive elements of a legally recognized claim" in order to survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
- Plaintiff must allege "sufficent facts from which it may be determined what liability forming conduct is being complained of and what injury the plaintiffs have suffered"
- When hearing a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the trial court must take the complaint's allegations as true and determine whether they are "sufficient ... relief may be granted under some legal theory"
- Plaintiff alleges that defendant "has used amplified sound from speakers aimed directly at [plaintiff's] premises."
- "can be clearly heard in plaintiff's home even with all plaintiff's doors and windows closed and their television playing"
- Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded for further proceedings on plaintiff's claim of private nuisance.
- A full description of the rationale is available below
Full Recounting of Facts
- In 1994, Evans filed suit against MacGregor Development Co. and Lochmere Swim & Tennis Club, Inc. (LSTC) claims noise from speakers and crowds interfered with the use of their own property.
- At trial, jury found in favor of Evans and awarded him $50k in compensatory damages and $135k in punitive damages.
- Trial court granted a permanent injunction and restraining order against MacGregor and LSTC to reduce noise encroachment on Evans's property.
- Judgement affirmed on appeal.
- In 1998, Lochmere Recreation Club, Inc. acquired the property from LSTC.
- Instant civil action initiated in December 2004, alleging that each summer from May to September 1998-2004, LSTC operated their club in a manner to create a nuisance.
- In January 2005, LSTC moved to dismiss.
- In April 2005, LSTC's motion to dismiss was granted.
- Evans's appealled.
- A list of the material facts is available above
Majority Full Argument
- Evans claim that the trial court erred in dismissing their claim.
- In considering a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the trial court must determine whether the factual allegations in thje complaint state a claim for relief.
- Plaintiff must state the "substantive elements of a legally recognized claim" in order to survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
- Plaintiff must allege "sufficent facts from which it may be determined what liability forming conduct is being complained of and what injury the plaintiffs have suffered"
- When hearing a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the trial court must take the complaint's allegations as true and determine whether they are "sufficient ... relief may be granted under some legal theory"
- Plaintiff alleges that defendant "has used amplified sound from speakers aimed directly at [plaintiff's] premises."
- "can be clearly heard in plaintiff's home even with all plaintiff's doors and windows closed and their television playing"
- Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded for further proceedings on plaintiff's claim of private nuisance.
- The core of the rationale is available above