Also known as: Rest. 2d Torts § 821B · Restatement 2d of Torts 821B · public nuisance · § 821B
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule providing that a public nuisance consists of an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public.
Royal Crest Hotels operates a testing facility that runs jet engines multiple times each week near a city park and schoolyard. The resulting noise and vibrations force cancellation of community events and render the public spaces unusable for hours at a time over several years. Residents sue alleging the activity unreasonably interferes with rights held in common by the public.
American Electric Power Co. operates coal-fired plants that release pollutants into interstate waterways used by the public for recreation and drinking supplies. The emissions create ongoing contamination that impairs public health and convenience across multiple states. Affected states bring suit claiming the discharges constitute an unreasonable interference with rights common to the general public.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Preston Mill Co. runs heavy machinery whose vibrations repeatedly frighten animals at a nearby public fairground used for community events. The interference forces cancellation of scheduled gatherings and creates safety risks for visitors on public property. Local officials seek abatement on the ground that the conduct unreasonably affects a right common to the general public.
Consolidated Rail Corp. experiences a derailment that releases chemicals near an airport runway, forcing temporary closure of the facility used by the traveling public. The incident creates widespread delays and safety concerns affecting thousands of passengers exercising a common right of transit. People Express Airlines sues alleging the release unreasonably interfered with public convenience.
Women’s Health Center maintains an abortion clinic where protesters regularly block sidewalks and entrances used by patients and the general public. The resulting interference prevents normal use of public rights-of-way and creates safety hazards for pedestrians. City officials seek injunctive relief claiming the conduct unreasonably impairs a right common to the general public.
Wright supplies a coach whose defective wheel causes it to collapse on a public highway, blocking traffic and injuring travelers exercising the common right of passage. The obstruction persists until the wreckage is cleared and creates ongoing hazards for other road users. Injured parties pursue claims asserting the condition unreasonably interfered with a right common to the general public.
The plaintiff must demonstrate an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public. Factors supporting a finding of unreasonableness include significant effects on public health, safety, peace, comfort, or convenience, violation of a statute or regulation, and conduct that is continuing or produces permanent effects known to the actor.
Supporting sources
No. Recovery of damages by a private plaintiff requires proof of harm different in kind from that suffered by the general public. A plaintiff who suffers only the same inconvenience as other members of the public lacks standing to recover individual damages even if a public nuisance exists.
Supporting sources
No. Permits and economic utility are relevant considerations but do not immunize conduct when the interference with public rights remains severe, prolonged, and unmitigated. Courts weigh these factors against the degree of interference with public comfort, convenience, and safety.
Supporting sources
Public nuisance protects rights common to the general public such as use of highways, parks, and public health, while private nuisance protects an individual’s interest in the use and enjoyment of specific land. The two doctrines address distinct interests even when the same conduct is involved.
…of Chief Justice Hughes Chapter 285 of the Session Laws of Minnesota for the year 1925[^maj-1] provides for the abatement, as a public nuisance, of a "malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper, magazine or other periodical." Section one of the Act is as follows: "Section 1. Any person who, as an individual, or as a member or…