Wis JI-Civil 1928

To sustain a claim of nuisance in this case, (plaintiff) must prove the following four

elements:

First, a public nuisance exist(s)(ed).2 A public nuisance is a condition or activity which

unreasonably interfere(s)(ed) with the use of a public place or with the activities of an entire

community. In determining whether an interference was unreasonable, you should consider

[select or modify as applicable] (whether the conduct involves a significant interference

with the public health, the public safety, the public peace, the public comfort or the public

convenience) (whether the conduct is proscribed by a statute, ordinance or administrative

regulation) (whether the conduct is of a continuing nature or has produced a permanent or

long-lasting effect, and, as the actor knows or has reason to know, has a significant effect

upon the public right.)3

Second, the interference resulted in harm to the plaintiff that was both (1) significant,

and (2) different from the harm suffered by other members of the public exercising the

common right that was the subject of interference.4 “Significant harm” means harm

involving more than a slight inconvenience or petty annoyance. When the interference

involves personal discomfort or annoyance, it is sometimes difficult to determine whether

the interference is significant. If ordinary persons living in the community would regard

the interference in question as substantially offensive, seriously annoying or intolerable,

then the interference is significant. If not, then the interference is not a significant one.

Rights are based on the general standards of ordinary persons in the community and not on

the standards of persons who are more sensitive than ordinary persons.

Third, (defendant) was negligent.5 A person is negligent when (he) (she) fails to

exercise ordinary care. Ordinary care is the care that a reasonable person would use in

similar circumstances. A person is not using ordinary care and is negligent, if the person,

without intending to do harm, (does something) (fails to do something) that a reasonable

person would recognize as creating an unreasonable risk of (invading or) interfering with

another’s use or enjoyment of property.

[WHERE NUISANCE IS PREDICATED UPON FAILURE TO ABATE, ADD THE

FOLLOWING: A person is not negligent for failing to abate a public nuisance unless the

nuisance existed long enough that (defendant) knew or should have known of the nuisance

and could have remedied it within a reasonable period of time.]6

Fourth, (defendant)’s negligence caused the public nuisance. This does not mean that

(defendant)’s negligence was “the cause” but rather “a cause” because a public nuisance

may have more than one cause. Someone’s negligence caused the public nuisance if it was

a substantial factor in producing the public nuisance. [A public nuisance may be caused by

one person’s negligence or by the combined negligence of two or more people.]7

VERDICT

Question No. 1: Did [Does] a public nuisance exist?

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

Question No. 2: If you answered “Yes” to Question 1, then answer this question:

Did the nuisance result in significant harm to (plaintiff) that was different from the harm

suffered by other members of the public exercising the common right that was the subject

of interference?8

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

Question No. 3: If you answered “Yes” to Question 2, then answer this question:

Was (defendant) negligent?

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

Question No. 4: If you answered “Yes” to Question 3, then answer this question:

Was (defendant’s) negligence a cause of the harm suffered by (plaintiff) as a result of the

public nuisance?

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

[INSERT QUESTIONS 5, 6 AND 7 IF THERE IS EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE ON

THE PART OF THE PLAINTIFF]9

Question No. 5: Was (plaintiff) negligent?

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

Question No. 6: If you answered “Yes” to Question No. 5, then answer this question:

Was (plaintiff’s) negligence a cause of the harm suffered by the plaintiff?

ANSWER: _________

(Yes/No)

Question No. 7: If you answered “Yes” to both Questions 4 and 6, then answer this

question; otherwise do not answer it:

Taking the total negligence which caused the harm suffered to be 100%, what percentage

of the total negligence do you attribute to:

Plaintiff - Percentage:____________%

Defendant - Percentage:____________%

Total: 100%

Question [No. 5] [No. 8]: Regardless of how you answered any of the other questions,

answer this question:

What sum of money will reasonably compensate (plaintiff) for harm suffered?

ANSWER: $_____________