## Facts

- McCarty owned and lived on residential property in a semi-rural area suited for country homes.
- After McCarty established his residence, Natural Carbonic Gas Co. built a nearby plant to manufacture carbonic acid gas.
- The plant generated steam by burning bituminous (soft) coal, emitting thick black smoke from smokestacks.
- Winds carried smoke, soot, and cinders onto McCarty’s premises, discoloring buildings, soiling the property, and interfering with home enjoyment.
- The condition materially reduced the property’s rental value (trial evidence supported a substantial reduction).
- Evidence showed a feasible alternative: using anthracite coal would materially reduce harmful smoke; the company used soft coal largely because it was cheaper.
- McCarty sued for private nuisance, seeking damages and an injunction against continued harmful emissions.

## Issues

1. Whether operating a lawful factory by burning soft coal that produces heavy smoke and soot materially affecting a neighbor’s home constitutes an actionable private nuisance when a feasible less-injurious method exists.
2. Whether damages were adequate, or whether equity could enjoin the continuing emissions in light of the locality and the avoidable nature of the harm.

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment (as modified in damages) awarding McCarty damages and injunctive relief.
- The court held the company’s emissions resulted from an unreasonable and unnecessary mode of operation and constituted a private nuisance.
- The injunction was modified to allow the company to apply in the future for alteration of the decree upon a showing that it could operate without injuring McCarty’s property.

## Legal Principles

- A landowner must use property so as not to injure another’s property; lawful industrial activity may still be a nuisance if conducted in an unreasonable manner.
- Substantial and material interference with the use and enjoyment of residential property, including physical soiling and measurable diminution in value, supports nuisance liability.
- Reasonableness turns in part on avoidability: choosing a more harmful method primarily to save expense can be unreasonable where practical alternatives exist.
- Equitable relief may issue to restrain a continuing nuisance, especially where the injury is recurring and not adequately remedied by damages alone; a decree may permit later modification if the nuisance is abated.

## Conclusion

The court treated heavy, recurring smoke and soot from a nearby plant as a private nuisance because the harm to a preexisting residence was substantial and avoidable through feasible operational changes, affirming damages and an injunction while permitting later modification upon proof the injury could be eliminated.


McCarty v. Nat. Carbonic Gas Co., 189 N.Y. 40, 81 N.E. 549 (N.Y. 1907)