First in Time

Nightclubs can make for very poor neighbors. Loud noise, traffic, and drunken patrons can be disruptive to the residents of nearby homes. These types of nuisances are the basis for a controversy brewing in Abilene.

A developer wants to build housing for low-income families near a nightclub. The club’s owner fears that the residents of the new building will complain about noise coming from his business. But a proper understanding of property rights would allay this fear. With a proper understanding of the right to property, this is clearly a case of “coming to the nuisance.”

Nuisance is founded on the principle that a property owner has the right to the peaceful enjoyment of his property. Loud noises late at night can interfere with that enjoyment. However, nuisance is highly contextual, and a property use that may be a nuisance in one case may not be a nuisance in another.

As an example, consider a bonfire on one’s property. In a neighborhood with homes close by, a bonfire could easily send plumes of smoke into a neighbor’s yard and interfere with his enjoyment of his property. However, a bonfire in the middle of a thousand-acre ranch is unlikely to impact anyone.

Included in the contextual nature of nuisance is the principle of “first in time, first in right.” An owner who has been using his property without creating a nuisance has a right to continue that use. For example, if a property owner chose to open a nightclub in or very near a neighborhood, loud noises would constitute a nuisance. The home owners were there first. However, if housing is built near an existing nightclub, residents of that housing have “come to the nuisance.” That is, the property use that creates the nuisance precedes the housing. The nightclub owner has a right to continue using his property for that purpose, and the residents of new housing do not have a legitimate complaint.

Noise from the nightclub is a legitimate concern, but it should be addressed by the developer. Indeed, he plans to take sound proofing measures to mitigate the nightclub’s noise. If those efforts prove less than satisfactory, the problem lies with the owner and the residents. They came to the nuisance.