## Facts

- Arlene Hobbs kept one or two horses in the backyard of her home in a residential area of Jefferson County, Colorado.
- A county zoning ordinance expressly permitted keeping up to two horses on her property.
- The trial court found Hobbs exercised reasonable care in maintaining the premises and violated no health regulations.
- The trial court also found the horses attracted flies and produced noxious odors that permeated the neighborhood.
- Adjoining landowners experienced substantial interference with the use and enjoyment of their property.
- The trial court classified the condition as a private nuisance in fact (nuisance per accidens).

## Issues

1. Whether a court may enjoin keeping horses as a private nuisance in fact when the use is expressly permitted by zoning and conducted with reasonable care and without health-code violations.
2. Whether zoning authorization deprives courts of power to declare a permitted land use a nuisance in fact and to grant injunctive relief.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the judgment upholding an injunction prohibiting Hobbs from keeping horses on her property.
- The Court held zoning permission does not immunize a land use from being declared a nuisance per accidens.
- Because the testimony transcript was not provided on appeal, the trial court’s factual findings (flies, odors, and substantial interference) were presumed correct and binding.
- The Court rejected the argument that prior Colorado precedent barred nuisance relief where zoning permits the activity.

## Legal Principles

- A lawful land use, including one authorized by zoning, may constitute a nuisance in fact due to locality, surroundings, or other circumstances.
- Zoning ordinances are not conclusive on nuisance; legislative authorization cannot confer a right to maintain a nuisance.
- Courts may grant equitable relief, including injunctions, to abate a continuing private nuisance that substantially interferes with neighboring property use and enjoyment.
- On appellate review, absent a certified transcript, trial court findings of fact are presumed correct and will not be disturbed.

## Conclusion

The court upheld an injunction against keeping horses in a residential backyard because, despite zoning अनुमति and reasonable care, the resulting flies, odors, and substantial interference with neighbors’ property rights supported a finding of private nuisance in fact and warranted equitable abatement.


Hobbs v. Smith, 177 Colo. 299, 493 P.2d 1352 (Colo. 1972)