Torts · MBE-tested

Ramsay v. Riddle & Thornton

1 D.C. 3991 Cranch 399·United States District Court for the District of Columbia·1806

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Ramsay v. Riddle & Thornton. The Court will not enjoin what, may or may not he nuisance. Motion to dissolve an injunction to restrain the converting a wooden warehouse into a bakehouse. Mr. F. L. Lee, and Mr. G. Lee, for the plaintiffs, in support of the injunction, cited 1 Fonb. 29; Amb. 159; 2 Yes. 452 ; Amb. 209; 2 Bro. C. C. 64; Milford, 103, 107; 3 Inst. 201; 3 Bl. Com. 216 ; Ld. Raym. 486; Wood’s Inst. 538 ; Cro. Car. 366; 2 Shower, 327; Strange, 1167; 12 Mod. 342; 16 Vin. 23. Mr. E. J. Lee, and Mr. Sivann, contra, cited 4 Bl. Com. 168; 1 Hawk. c. 75, % 12; 3 Bl. Com. 219; Id. 5; 1 Hawk. c. 75; 3 Atk. 21; 12 Mod. 510 ; 3 Atk. 750 ; 1 Fonb. 21, 29, 30; 4 Bro. C. C. 165; 2 Ves. Jr. 42; 16 Vin. 23; 2 Har. Ch. 237. Mr. Tones, for the plaintiffs, cited Fran. Max. 30 ; 1 Burr. 334; 6 Mod. 145; Bac. Ab. tit. Nuisance. The injunction was dissolved without costs, (nem. con.) [MAJORITY — The CouRT] The CouRT said, if the house in fitting up, should not be well secured against danger from fire, it might be the ground of an injunction to prevent the use of it as a bakehouse.