## Facts

- Neighboring homeowners in a single-family residential area in Brigantine, New Jersey, sought equitable relief against Joseph Chaikin and spouse for operating a privately owned windmill on their property.
- The Chaikins obtained a building permit and built a roughly 60-foot-high windmill tower located about ten feet from a neighboring property line.
- After operation began, neighbors reported persistent, offensive noise that allegedly caused stress-related symptoms and substantially impaired enjoyment of their homes.
- Sound measurements associated with the windmill generally ranged from 56 to 61 dBA, exceeding the city’s 50 dBA noise limit.
- Because the property was near the Atlantic Ocean, wind conditions made the noise frequent and effectively continuous when the windmill operated.
- The court previously entered a temporary restraining order limiting operation to two hours per day for maintenance pending trial.
- The Chaikins counterclaimed, seeking to enjoin the Roses’ heat pump as a nuisance; evidence indicated it also exceeded 50 dBA, but the claimed impact on the Chaikins was comparatively minor.
- The manufacturer, installer, and the City of Brigantine were joined as third-party defendants and agreed to be bound by the trial result without participating.

## Issues

1. Whether the windmill constituted a private nuisance by unreasonably interfering with neighbors’ use and enjoyment of their land.
2. Whether the windmill’s operation violated applicable municipal noise regulations in a manner supporting injunctive relief.
3. Whether the Roses’ heat pump constituted an actionable private nuisance warranting an injunction on the Chaikins’ counterclaim.

## Decision

- The court found the windmill created an unreasonable interference with neighboring owners’ use and enjoyment of their property and constituted a private nuisance.
- The court permanently enjoined operation of the windmill (shutdown), concluding limited operation would not adequately protect neighboring property rights.
- The court found the windmill’s measured sound levels exceeded the municipal 50 dBA limit, treating the ordinance violation as strong evidence supporting unreasonableness and equitable relief.
- The court denied the Chaikins’ counterclaim to enjoin the Roses’ heat pump, finding any interference to the Chaikins was not sufficiently substantial or unreasonable to be actionable.

## Legal Principles

- A private nuisance is an unreasonable interference with another’s use and enjoyment of land.
- Unreasonableness is determined case by case by balancing the utility of the defendant’s conduct against the gravity and character of the harm.
- The standard is measured against ordinary people of normal sensibilities, not exceptionally sensitive reactions.
- Proof of nuisance in equity requires clear and convincing evidence.
- Exceeding a municipal noise limit is probative of unreasonableness but does not, by itself, compel nuisance liability; the court considers volume, character, frequency, duration, and contextual impact.
- Even socially useful conduct (including energy conservation) may be enjoined when it causes substantial, continuing invasions of neighboring property rights.

## Conclusion

The court permanently enjoined operation of a residential windmill after finding that its continuous, ordinance-exceeding noise unreasonably interfered with neighbors’ use and enjoyment of their homes, while denying a reciprocal nuisance claim against a neighbor’s heat pump because the interference was not substantial enough to warrant injunctive relief.


Rose v. Chaikin, 453 A.2d 1378 (N.J. Super. Ct. Ch. Div. 1982)