Fontainebleau Hotel v 45-25

parent nodes: air and light | Calabresi corollary | Coase Theorem | nuisance | Rockenbach v Apostle

Fontainebleau Hotel v 45-25

Case

P and D build neighboring hotels
D increases the height of his hotel, resulting in less sun to P's hotel
P brings a nuisance claim against D

Analysis

Because D's addition did serve some useful purpose, it cannot be considered as similar to a spite fence.The doctrine of [ancient lights] also does not apply. Additionally, since the parties are close to each other, work in the same line of business, etc., the Coase Theorem probably applies. (That is, the rule does not matter for aggregate utility -- there could be a redistribution effect on the wealth of the two parties. See Calabresi corollary.] Thus, the court will not let P recover from D.

Additionally, construction projects on this scale probably require some sort of non-judicial approval from zoning boards, local authorities, etc. The court will probably be hesitant to override the decisions of these local authorities.