Air Pollution as Public Nuisance

Comparing Modern-Day Greenhouse Gas Abatement with Nineteenth-Century Smoke Abatement

Bibliographic Data

ID21359460
AuthorsKate Markey (University of Michigan Law School), Kate A Markey (0000-0002-7064-2362, University of Michigan, corresponding author)
Year2022
Issue120.7
Pages1535
Publication date2022-01-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueMichigan Law Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0026-2234 • E-ISSN: 1939-8557
PublisherUniversity of Michigan Law Library (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.36644/mlr.120.7.air
OpenAlexW4285162081
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited2

Public nuisance allows plaintiffs to sue actors in tort for causing environmental harm that disrupts the public’s use and enjoyment of the land. In recent years, state and local governments have filed public nuisance actions against oil companies, hoping to hold them responsible for the harm of climate change. Since no plaintiff has prevailed on the merits so far, whether these lawsuits are worth bringing, given the other legal avenues available, remains an open question. This Comment situates these actions in their appropriate historical context to show that these lawsuits are neither unprecedented nor futile. In particular, it examines the use of nuisance actions in the successful abatement of “the smoke evil” in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to illustrate how nuisance law develops over time, interacts with other forms of environmental regulation, and encourages the development of new technology. This Comment concludes that plaintiffs can in fact succeed on the merits, and, regardless of their success, climate nuisance suits can promote stricter federal regulation, serve an expressive function, and incentivize the development of air pollution abatement technology

Business · Context (archaeology) · Economics · Geography · Harm · Law and economics · Liability · Nuisance · Plaintiff · Political science · Tort · Trespass · Law · Property Rights and Legal Doctrine

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access