## Facts

- Maple Lane Farms operated as a working farm in rural Blount County, Tennessee, producing crops and livestock.
- To increase revenue, the farm added public attractions and seasonal festivals; from 2006 to 2008, these attractions generated a substantial portion of the farm’s revenue.
- The festivals included activities such as strawberry picking, corn mazes, hayrides, and pumpkin picking.
- The farm also began hosting recurring amplified music concerts, including nighttime events, which a neighboring landowner, Velda Shore, alleged created disruptive noise interfering with her use and enjoyment of her adjacent property.
- Shore complained to county officials, and the Blount County Board of Zoning Appeals determined the concerts were not agriculture-related and limited the property to one concert per year.
- The farm indicated it would continue holding multiple concerts despite the zoning appeals board’s decision.
- Shore sued, alleging common-law nuisance and asserting the concerts were not exempt agricultural uses under county zoning rules.
- After Shore presented her proof at trial, the chancery court granted the farm’s motion for involuntary dismissal, relying on the Tennessee Right to Farm Act and concluding the concerts were “agriculture” exempt from zoning regulation.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the plaintiff presented a prima facie case of common-law nuisance based on recurring amplified concerts.
2. Whether the Tennessee Right to Farm Act barred the nuisance claim as a matter of law.
3. Whether amplified music concerts on farm property constituted “agriculture” under local zoning regulations, exempting them from zoning control.

## Decision

- The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed the involuntary dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.
- The Court held the plaintiff’s proof was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of common-law nuisance.
- The Court held the Tennessee Right to Farm Act did not automatically bar a nuisance claim challenging amplified concert activity.
- The Court held amplified music concerts were not “agriculture” for purposes of the zoning laws and therefore were not exempt from local land-use regulation.

## Legal Principles

- A common-law nuisance claim may proceed when evidence supports a reasonable inference that an activity unreasonably interferes with another’s use and enjoyment of land, including through substantial noise in a rural residential setting.
- The Tennessee Right to Farm Act protects qualifying agricultural operations from nuisance liability tied to ordinary farming activities and changed local conditions; it does not provide blanket immunity for non-agricultural commercial entertainment conducted on farm property.
- Zoning exemptions for “agriculture” cover core farming activities and directly incidental uses; ticketed amplified music concerts primarily serving entertainment purposes are not “agriculture” under such zoning definitions.

## Conclusion

The Tennessee Supreme Court allowed the neighboring landowner’s nuisance claim to proceed and held that recurring amplified concerts on farm property are not agricultural uses exempt from zoning regulation, limiting the reach of right-to-farm protections to bona fide farming operations rather than unrelated entertainment events.


Shore v. Maple Lane Farms, LLC, 411 S.W.3d 405 (Tenn. 2013)