## Facts

- Plaintiffs lived about 250 feet from a Presbyterian church in the Village of Schoharie, New York.
- The church played hourly chimes daily from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and carillon music daily at noon and 6:00 p.m.
- Plaintiffs alleged the sounds disrupted family life, interfered with sleep, and invaded residential privacy, causing stress.
- Plaintiffs sued alleging (1) private nuisance and (2) violation of a village ordinance.
- The church submitted an expert affidavit stating the chimes/music were no louder than passing vehicles and noted roughly 6,500 vehicles passed plaintiffs’ home daily.
- The church also submitted affidavits from nearby residents stating they found the chimes pleasant.
- Plaintiffs’ opposition relied largely on their own subjective affidavits describing disturbance.

## Issues

1. Whether the chimes and carillon constituted a private nuisance by substantially and unreasonably interfering with plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of their property.
2. Whether plaintiffs produced evidence sufficient to show a violation of the cited village ordinance.
3. Whether plaintiffs’ showing supported a preliminary injunction and defeated defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s order.
- The court held the complaint was dismissible because it failed to allege key nuisance elements, including that the interference was substantial and unreasonable.
- The court further held that, on the summary judgment record, plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue because they offered no objective evidence countering defendant’s expert and corroborating affidavits.
- The court rejected the ordinance claim for lack of evidentiary support that the church’s conduct fell within the ordinance’s prohibition.
- The court affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction because plaintiffs did not show a likelihood of success on the merits.

## Legal Principles

- A private nuisance requires an intentional and unreasonable invasion of another’s use and enjoyment of land, including interference that is substantial in nature and unreasonable in character.
- A nuisance claim must plead the essential elements; failure to allege substantial and unreasonable interference may warrant dismissal.
- On summary judgment, once the movant makes a prima facie showing, the opponent must present competent, objective evidence raising a material factual dispute; conclusory or purely subjective assertions are insufficient.
- Preliminary injunctive relief requires, among other things, a likelihood of success on the merits; failure to show merit defeats the request.

## Conclusion

The court upheld dismissal of homeowners’ nuisance and ordinance claims seeking to stop church chimes and carillon music because the complaint was deficient and, in any event, plaintiffs relied mainly on subjective annoyance rather than objective proof of substantial, unreasonable interference or an ordinance violation.


Langan v. Bellinger, 203 A.D.2d 857, 611 N.Y.S.2d 59 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep’t 1994)