## Facts

- Neighbors owned adjoining rural properties in Blount County, Alabama; the plaintiffs lived for about 15 years on a 47-acre farm used as their home.
- Defendants began a large-scale commercial hog operation on adjacent land in early 1970, consisting of two hog parlors (about 1,000 hogs in one and about 400 in the other) and waste lagoons.
- Waste was flushed from the parlors into lagoons, where chemical processes broke down waste and emitted strong odors.
- The plaintiffs’ house was estimated to be roughly 200 to 1,000 feet from the nearest parlor/lagoon.
- Plaintiffs and other witnesses testified the odor was persistent and severe, forcing them to keep doors and windows closed, causing nausea and loss of appetite, and preventing normal outdoor use of their home.
- Defendants conceded some odor existed but disputed how far it traveled.
- The trial judge personally inspected the premises and found the operation emitted foul odors that detrimentally affected the plaintiffs.

## Issues

1. Whether a lawfully operated hog-parlor and lagoon operation in a rural agricultural area can constitute a private nuisance based on offensive odors substantially interfering with neighbors’ use and enjoyment of their home.
2. Whether the trial court properly exercised equitable discretion by issuing a conditional injunction permitting continued operation if defendants paid a fixed sum of damages.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the trial court’s final decree.
- The Court upheld the finding that the odors created a private nuisance despite the operation’s lawful, rural character.
- The Court upheld the conditional injunction: the operation would be enjoined unless defendants paid $3,000 in damages within 30 days, in which event the injunction would not take effect.
- Applying deference to findings based on ore tenus testimony and the trial judge’s inspection, the Court found no basis to disturb the nuisance determination or remedy.

## Legal Principles

- A lawful business, including agricultural activity in a rural area, may constitute a private nuisance if it creates a substantial and unreasonable interference with neighboring owners’ use and enjoyment of their property (e.g., persistent, offensive odors causing physical discomfort and restricting ordinary residential use).
- In equity cases decided on ore tenus evidence, especially where the trial judge personally inspects the premises, appellate courts will not reverse factual findings unless plainly erroneous.
- Equity courts have discretion to tailor nuisance remedies, including conditional injunctions and awards of permanent damages that allow a defendant to continue an activity upon compensating affected neighbors.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed that severe, persistent odors from a large hog operation could be enjoined as a private nuisance even in a rural setting, and it approved a conditional decree allowing the defendants to avoid shutdown by paying a fixed award of damages.


Baldwin v. McClendon, 288 So. 2d 761 (Ala. 1974)