Jacobson v. Vidal

Superior Court of Rhode Island

Jacobson v. Vidal

9 R.I. Dec. 11

CourtSuperior Court of Rhode Island

DecidedJuly 8, 1932

DocketEq. No. 545

StatusPublished

This text of 9 R.I. Dec. 11 (Jacobson v. Vidal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jacobson v. Vidal, 9 R.I. Dec. 11 (R.I. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

POULIOT, J.

This cause is before the Court on bill, answer, and proof.

The petitioner, in the opinion of the Court, has submitted sufficient evidence to impress the Court with the realization that a condition exists in the operation of the respondent’s business that must be remedied. Therefore the Court finds that the petitioner is entitled to a decree enjoining the respondent from maintaining the nuisance alleged, but counsel having stated to the Court that a serious effort is being made to abate the nuisance, and that some additional time will be required to perfect the elimination process of the smoke nuisance, the Court decides that a decree may be entered for the petitioner, but that no process to enforce the same be issued prior to September 1st, 1932.

A decree may be entered in accordance with this decision.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

POULIOT, J.

This cause is before the Court on bill, answer, and proof.

The petitioner, in the opinion of the Court, has submitted sufficient evidence to impress the Court with the realization that a condition exists in the operation of the respondent’s business that must be remedied. Therefore the Court finds that the petitioner is entitled to a decree enjoining the respondent from maintaining the nuisance alleged, but counsel having stated to the Court that a serious effort is being made to abate the nuisance, and that some additional time will be required to perfect the elimination process of the smoke nuisance, the Court decides that a decree may be entered for the petitioner, but that no process to enforce the same be issued prior to September 1st, 1932.

A decree may be entered in accordance with this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 R.I. Dec. 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacobson-v-vidal-risuperct-1932.