Toyo Tire North America Manuf. v. Davis

Toyo Tire North America Manufacturing Inc. operated a large tire manufacturing and distribution facility about 625 feet from the home of Lynn and Duron Davis. The Davises sued Toyo Tire, alleging that its facility was a nuisance and has resulted in a trespass, causing them discomfort and annoyance and diminished their property’s value. The trial court denied Toyo Tire’s motion for summary judgment; the Court of Appeals affirmed that order. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to address two issues: (1) Toyo Tire’s argument that the Davises presented insufficient evidence, at the summary judgment stage of the case, to show that the decrease in their property value was proximately caused by the alleged nuisance and trespass; and (2) Toyo Tire’s argument that even if the Davises could establish causation, they could not recover damages both for their discomfort and annoyance and for the diminution in their property value, because that would constitute an impermissible double recovery. The Supreme Court rejected Toyo's first argument, and concluded that the past discomfort and annoyance caused by a continuing nuisance and the diminution in the property’s market value resulting from the expectation of continuing discomfort and annoyance constituted two separate injuries, and the Davises, who both occupied and owned the property, could potentially recover damages for both injuries. Accordingly, the Court affirmed. View "Toyo Tire North America Manuf. v. Davis" on Justia Law