N.C.P.I.—Civil 805.25

A nuisance is the substantial and unreasonable interference with the

use and enjoyment of another’s property.

The (state number) issue reads:

"Did the defendant substantially and unreasonably interfere with the

use and enjoyment of the plaintiff’s property?"

On this issue the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. This means that

the plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence, two things:

First, that the defendant substantially1 interfered with the plaintiff's use

and enjoyment of the plaintiff’s property. Interference is substantial when it

results in significant annoyance, material physical discomfort, or injury to a

person's health or property.2 A slight inconvenience or a petty annoyance is

not a substantial interference.

Second, that such substantial interference was unreasonable.

Substantial interference is unreasonable if a person of ordinary prudence and

discretion would consider it excessive or inappropriate after giving due

consideration to the interest of the plaintiff, the interest of the defendant and

the interest of the community.3 In determining whether such substantial

interference is unreasonable, you may consider

[the surroundings and conditions under which the defendant's

interference occurs]

[the character of the location]

[the nature, utility and social value of the defendant's operation]

[the nature, utility and social value of the plaintiff's use and enjoyment

that have been invaded]

[the suitability of the location for the defendant's operation]

[the suitability of the location for the plaintiff’s use]

[the extent, nature and frequency of the harm to the plaintiff's interest]

[the priority in time of occupation or conflicting uses between the

plaintiff and the defendant]4

[(state any other factor arising from the evidence)].

Finally, as to this issue on which the plaintiff has the burden of proof, if

you find by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant substantially

and unreasonably interfered with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of the

plaintiff’s property, then it would be your duty to answer this issue "Yes" in

favor of the plaintiff.

If, on the other hand, you fail to so find, then it would be your duty to

answer this issue "No" in favor of the defendant.