Emily owns a house in a suburban neighborhood. Her neighbor, John, has recently started a hobby that involves using loud machinery every evening, causing significant noise that disrupts Emily's peace and quiet. Emily decides to sue John for private nuisance. Which of the following is the most viable defense John can raise against Emily's nuisance claim?
John claims that Emily has not been significantly affected by the noise.
John argues that his noise levels comply with local zoning ordinances regulating noise for his activity.
John states that he did not intend to cause any disturbance.
John argues that the noise is caused by a third party and not his machinery.
John's defense that his noise levels comply with local zoning ordinances is valid because adherence to established laws regulating noise can negate a nuisance claim. Arguing that Emily is not significantly affected does not address the interference, stating he did not intend to cause disturbance is irrelevant to nuisance, and blaming a third party does not absolve him of responsibility for his own activities.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.