Nuisance
By Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA
© Copyright 1991, 1998 by Church Law & Tax Report. All rights reserved. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Church Law & Tax Report, PO Box 1098, Matthews, NC 28106. Reference Code: m
In general, the term nuisance refers to an activity or use of property that results in material annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort, or harm to others. It is, for example, a nuisance to use one's property in such a way as to cause excessive noise, odor, smoke, vibration, debris, drainage, obstruction, or injury to neighboring landowners. It ordinarily is not a defense that the condition constituting a nuisance existed before the arrival of neighboring residents.
An activity or condition permitted on church property can constitute a nuisance. One court has held:
A church building is as lawful as any other structure. It is not only lawful, but essential to our Christian civilization . . . . It is not, however, above the law. Like any other edifice or structure, however lawful in purpose and use ordinarily, it may become unlawful. The place of its location, and the time and manner of its use, may be such, under the circumstances, as to constitute that interference with the rights of others as to become in law a nuisance . . . .1
To illustrate, a church that conducted lengthy revival services punctuated by shouting and singing that could be heard more than a mile away was found guilty of permitting a nuisance.2
Another court refused to prevent the construction of a church in a residential district despite the allegations of neighboring landowners that the church consisted of “holy rollers” who would conduct boisterous services until the late hours of the evening, making neighboring homes unfit for habitation.3 The court reasoned that the existence of a church building close to the homes of neighboring landowners, as well as the noise that might result from an “orderly and properly conducted Christian service therein,” were not matters that would constitute a nuisance. The court did acknowledge that it was possible for a church to conduct services with sufficient noise to constitute a nuisance. Nevertheless, the court concluded that it could not prevent the construction of a church in a residential neighborhood based on the mere conjecture of neighboring landowners that the church ultimately would constitute a nuisance.
Another court, in a similar case concluded that “[s]omething more than the threatened commission of an offense against the law of the land is necessary to call into exercise the injunctive powers of the court.”4 The court also held that a church building itself is not a nuisance, and therefore its construction cannot be enjoined on the ground that it will be the source of unreasonably loud worship services. The proper remedy for unreasonably loud services, concluded the court, would be to halt or abate the excessive noise, and not to prevent the construction of the church.
The playing of church bells three times a day and four times on Sundays at regular hours for a period of approximately four minutes has been held not to constitute a nuisance despite the contention of neighboring landowners that the volume of the bells adversely affected their health and serenity. The court held that a material interference with physical comfort must occur before a nuisance can exist, and that the ringing of church bells simply did not constitute a material interference:
Bells in one form or another are a tradition throughout the world. . . . In the Christian world, every church is proud of its bells. The bells are rung for joy, for sadness, for warnings and for worship. There are people who find total beauty in the . . . daily ritual ringing at the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris. There is little question that the sound is often deadening when these bells start to ring, but for the general enjoyment of the public, it is considered acceptable.5
Finally, it has been held that the use of church property for school purposes does not amount to a nuisance.1
For related information on this topic see the following articles:
Regulation of Charitable Solicitations
Limitations on Charitable Giving
Federal and State Securities Laws
Judicial Resolution of Church Disputes
The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987
Americans with Disabilities Act
Political Activities by Churches and Other Religious Organizations