Connecticut Statutes

§ 52-481 — Abatement of manufacturer's nuisance. Temporary injunction.

Connecticut·Title 52 Civil Actions·Ch. 916 Injunctions
(a)If any manufacturer carries on his business, or exposes the material used therein, or refuse produced thereby, so as to constitute a nuisance to the public or to individuals, any persons aggrieved thereby may unite in a complaint to the superior court for the judicial district where the nuisance exists, for the discontinuance or abatement of the nuisance, making the manufacturer, if known to them, the defendant. If the manufacturer is not known, they may make the person in charge of the premises the defendant. Service on the person in charge shall be sufficient notice to any defendant living out of this state.
(b)Each complaint shall be heard at the first session of the court or promptly thereafter unless continued for cause. A continuance may be granted upon such conditions and with

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

Connecticut § 52-481 (Abatement of manufacturer's nuisance. Temporary injunction.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cornerstone Realty, Inc. v. Dresser Rand Co.
993 F. Supp. 107 (D. Connecticut, 1998)
13 case citations
Sealy Connecticut, Inc. v. Litton Industries, Inc.
93 F. Supp. 2d 177 (D. Connecticut, 2000)
10 case citations

Legislative History

(1949 Rev., S. 8217; 1967, P.A. 656, S. 51; P.A. 78-280, S. 2, 127; P.A. 82-160, S. 178.) History: 1967 act substituted “when the court is not sitting” for “in vacation”; P.A. 78-280 substituted “judicial district” for “county”; P.A. 82-160 rephrased the section and inserted Subsec. indicators. What constitutes a nuisance of this character. 21 C. 218; 33 C. 121; 39 C. 426, 493; 100 C. 667. Petition must aver that petitioner is aggrieved. 39 C. 427. Effect upon complainant's family material question. 71 C. 647. No injunction against production of castor oil where court found no substantial violation of plaintiff's rights and use of defendant's plant was not unreasonable. 130 C. 485. History discussed; section does not give an exclusive remedy to the Superior Court in an action of nuisance; a statute creating a new remedy for an existing right does not preclude the use of existing common law remedies. 153 C. 661. Statute is codification of existing law; it indirectly recognizes the doctrine of balancing conveniences. 11 CS 93. Persons of ordinary health and sensitiveness are to be considered in the determination of the existence of a nuisance. 22 CS 381.

Nearby Sections

15
View on official source ↗