- Have you ever had a
neighbor that was so bad you just wished you could sue them and get them to move
out of the neighborhood. - I want you out! - Well, today we're going to indulge in your neighbor-suing fantasy with some of the worst neighbors
that have ever existed. On the matter of next door neighbors, English author G.K
Chesterson famously quipped, "The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, "and also to love our enemies; "probably because generally
they are the same people." Clearly, Mr. Chesterton had
some bad neighbors himself or knows some jaded real estate lawyers. But it's an all too relatable sentiment because few parts of life
inspire more acrimony and generate more attorney's fees than drawn out fights between neighbors. Which might explain why neighbor
disputes seem to make up 90% of sitcom plot lines. - Ew! - What? - Ugly naked guy's taking
his turkey out of the oven. (audience laughing) - And it's all too common
that neighbors are presented with straightforward
solutions to their problems, but due to pride, animosity, or both, they choose to dig in their heels and incur tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, in legal fees instead, which is bad for neighbors,
but great for lawyers. So let's start with property
lines and boundary disputes. Perhaps the most common neighbor dispute is when one property owner discovers that his or her neighbor has built a fence or other structure that
crosses the boundary line, which creates a cause of
action known as encroachment. And most of the time such
encroachment is unintentional. Boundary lines can date back
decades or even centuries, and as time passes, successor
neighbors can forget exactly where the original lines are. When a road or structure,
or even a pile of rocks, extends into a neighbor's property, this also creates a cause of
action for continuing trespass. And to get the court to order the removal of these infringing structures, an individual can file a
common law action for ejectment to prove that the individual
has the sole right to possess the property
that is being encroached or trespassed upon. But ultimately, the
simplest way to resolve boundary disputes is for
the parties to get together and pay for a lot line adjustment that moves the official property lines to match the neighbors'
current boundaries. But if every neighbor
could resolve disputes in a calm and mature fashion, there'd be no need for this
video about nightmare neighbors. For example, when Gabriel
Brawn of Bangor, Maine discovered that his property line included one half of
his neighbor's garage, he then decided to take
matters into his own hands by sawing the garage in half. I mean, from a legal perspective, absolutely the wrong way
to handle that dispute, but that is some tremendously precise construction work right there, some real Matt Risinger stuff. - We'll see you next
time on The Build Show! - Here's the background. In 2012, Gabriel and
his wife, Tracy Brawn, moved to Gabriel's childhood home and peacefully coexisted with
their neighbor, Steve Ritter. But things changed after
Mr. Ritter died in 2016 and Steve's widow, Theresa Laythe-Ritter, and their son Blake took
ownership of the property. Gabriel described Blake
as, "A terrible neighbor," who he alleged had late night parties and was rude to the
Brawns and their children. The dispute escalated in April 2020 when the Brawns put down wood chips near the previously
established boundary line to allow a tractor to travel downhill to clean up downed tree limbs. Blake responded to this
act by planting a stake in the ground where the chips were placed and demanding that
Gabriel remove the chips from what he claimed
was the Ritter property. Gabriel then hired two
different land surveyors to check the boundary lines, who both concluded that
half of the Ritter's garage was on the Brawn property. Blake asked Gabriel for the opportunity to remove his father's
ashes from the garage, but Gabriel claims his
neighbor began throwing trash and smashing glass and throwing bureaus in front of the lawn. The next day, Gabriel,
who works in construction, sawed the garage in half. Following widespread media coverage, the Ritters sued the
Brawns and the surveyors, the purported crane operator, and even media organizations that reported on this controversy. Shortly after this lawsuit was filed, the judge ordered the
Brawns to set aside $150,000 to pay future damages, noting the Ritters would
likely prevail at trial. Gabriel, who was representing
himself and his wife instead of hiring a lawyer, now can see that he could
have handled this better, noting that he would have liked to, "Have seen a better resolution
to the dispute myself." I mean, sure, Brawn
could have hired a lawyer to negotiate a redrawing
of the boundary lines, kind of like how the
Ritters had hired lawyers to litigate their case. But instead of doing the sensible thing, Gabriel clearly had been guided
by one animating principle: How would a cartoon neighbor
act in this situation? - There. Now we live in
completely separate houses. I don't ever have to look at you-- - Now here's some #NotLegalAdvice. If you get into a legal dispute, it's a good idea to hire a lawyer instead of trying to
fix everything yourself. That's why in the legal
profession we have a saying: "Only a fool would have
himself as a client." And given the likelihood of
the self-represented Brawns losing to the lawyered-up Ritter clan, this is just another
example of brain over brawn. Yeah! Nailed it! Come for the legal analysis,
and stay for the terrible puns. Now let's talk about easements. Anyone who makes the leap from
being a renter to a homeowner does so with the intention
of having property that is truly their own and no one else's. However, what a lot of
people may not realize is that most homes come with easements, which expressly grant certain
rights to allow third parties to enter your land and use your property. And when there are
disputes about strangers coming onto your property, that's where you can run into problems. Easements grant individuals,
companies, or the government the right to use or access
another individual's property for limited purposes. These easement rights typically
include physical access, like the right of way, or utility easements that
allow public entities to install telephone poles, gas lines, and other infrastructure. And parties can also
obtain negative easements, which gives a holder of the
right to require a neighbor to do or not do specific things, such as preventing an owner
from blocking the neighbors view or obstructing water flow. And of these easements, the most common one is
the driveway easement in which a neighbor has the right to use the property owner's
driveway to access his land. You wouldn't think that a driveway could be a source of such conflict, but then you've never lived
next to Minnie Driver. I mean, I haven't either,
but judging by her feud with her 70-something-year-old
disabled neighbor over a driveway easement,
I'm not sure I want to. Here's what happened in that case. In September 2014, the
"Good Will Hunting" star moved in next door to Daniel Perelmutter, a 74-year-old disabled Army vet and heart transplant survivor
who walks with a cane. Problems began immediately
that December when Perelmutter began building an ultra
modern home on his property bordering on a shared driveway. Perelmutter claimed that Driver
had gone to great lengths to block access to his driveway easement that leads to several parcels of land, including Driver's property. Driver further blocked the easement with the installation
of an electronic gate to protect her from the paparazzi. This was originally done with
the blessings of Perelmutter and his wife, but Driver
allegedly changed the code and disabled the manual gate switch after construction began. In November 2015, Driver obtained a
temporary restraining order against Mr. Perelmutter claiming that he, "Cursed us and blew smoke
in my children's faces," and otherwise put the Driver
family in fear of their lives. Perelmutter denies this misconduct. In 2016, the Perelmutters
sued for trespass, private nuisance, assault, and intentional infliction
of emotional distress. He claims in his suit that driver threw, "Baby food jars filled with black paint "against the walls of his home." Driver denied Perelmutter's allegations and claimed that he was the one who was deliberately
blocking the driveway, as Perelmutter had installed a new wall that narrowed the driveway
down from 20 to 14 feet wide. In November 2016, Driver went
to Los Angeles Superior Court in Perelmutter was
found guilty of contempt for shrinking the driveway
easement with his wall. He was ordered to do 10
hours of community service and pay $200,000, plus
Driver's attorney's fees. To avoid jail, Perelmutter
reluctantly tore down that wall, but continued to lash out at Driver in a January 2017 court
hearing alleging she, "Perjured herself in every way "with her testimony of complete lies, "putting on a performance
worthy of an Oscar winner." Perelmutter then file a new lawsuit accusing Driver of outrageous
and malicious behavior, screaming insults and obscenity at him, driving at him in her car, causing $20,000 worth of
damage to his property, and threatening to have his
construction workers "deported." Perelmutter also claimed that after winning the
prior lawsuit against him, he videotaped Driver, "Gloating, "telling him that she
was glad he got F'ed, "and wishing that he would
lose everything as a result." However, it's clear
Perelmutter hasn't been the most diplomatic of neighbors either, previously telling the
dailymail.com about Ms. Driver, "She won and I hope she spends "every dollar on chemotherapy." Jesus. And after three years of fighting, the neighbors finally reached a confidential settlement agreement for all claims in April 2018. The presiding judge, Rita Miller, had expressed disappointment in court that the two couldn't
resolve their differences without litigation, noting with a chuckle, "The heart of the case is who's
richer than who, I guess." So my Legal Eagles, the big takeaway here
is that if you disagree with the scope of an easement, it's best to try talking
things out with your neighbor. Unless, of course, you're very angry and have hundreds of thousands
of dollars for legal fees, in which case my telephone
line is always open. But that takes us to private
and public nuisances. One of the most common
complaints people have about their neighbors is
that they are annoying, and most of the time being
annoying is not a crime, even though it definitely should be. But at a certain point, did you know that you can be so annoying that it actually violates the law? Well, this brings us to
our next legal concept, nuisance law. Individuals who own or occupy real estate have a common law right to what's called quiet enjoyment of their property, meaning that they have the right to use and enjoy their premises in
peace without interference from the surrounding
neighbors or landlord. A person commits the tort of nuisance when a person in
possession of real property engages in an activity that
significantly interferes with user enjoyment of another's property, or otherwise affects the
health, safety, welfare, or comfort of the public at large. So when you hear stories about nightmare celebrity neighbors, those claims typically
fall under nuisance law. For example, in 2011, eccentric filmmaker and foot
enthusiasm Quentin Tarantino brought a private nuisance
lawsuit against his neighbors, "True Blood" creator Alan Ball and his partner Peter Macdissi, alleging their macaw parrots emitted, "Ear splitting shrieks and screams "for seven to eight hours a day." Tarantino argued that the
macaws subjected him to, "Obnoxious pterodactyl-like screams," which have, "robbed Mr.
Tarantino of the ability "to find peace in his home." And if you think
Tarantino is exaggerating, this is what a macaw call sounds like. (macaw screeching) (image beeping) But sometimes the nuisance
doesn't affect one person, it affects the public at large. And there was a public nuisance case relating to the Sriracha
factory in Irvine, California. The city of Irvine filed
a public nuisance lawsuit against the hot sauce maker after residents began to complain about, "Burning eyes, irritated
throats, and headaches." With other residents claiming that they moved outdoor activities indoors and even would leave their
homes to avoid the stench. After Sriracha agreed to
install new filtration systems, the city dropped the suit
in the following year. But a court is not likely
to stop every annoyance. In defense of a nuisance claim, a defendant might argue
that the offending activity complies with zoning laws, and a court is less
likely to halt an activity when the local government has approved it. Or a defendant might also invoke the Coming to the Nuisance defense. This means that if a defendant can show that they engaged in this conduct before the plaintiff
moved to the neighborhood, the plaintiff was therefore
completely aware of the activity and chose to live there,
a type of consent. So if you have a very annoying neighbor and talking it out doesn't work, just know that you can
always call a lawyer, because the one thing you
definitely shouldn't do is start erecting things out of spite. So let's talk about spite, specifically spite fences, spite houses, and other spite structures. Because of certain homeowners, those with the time,
money, and malicious intent to build impractical
structures upon their land often do so just to annoy their neighbors. - All for the express
purpose of taking you down. - And you better believe that
there is an entire area of law devoted to such structures. Now, you might have heard
of a spite fence before, but there's actually all sorts of things that you can build out of spite. Now, the law has a specific legal term to describe any structure
built out of spite, and Legal Eagles, I'm going to need you to be very mature about this because the very real legal
term is malicious erections. Hey, hey, there is nothing
funny about malicious erections, but please consult your lawyer if you have a malicious erection
lasting more than 10 hours. Now, perhaps the most famous spite fence is the Crocker spite
fence of San Francisco where a 19th century railroad baron built a 40-foot fence
around his neighbor's home after they refused to
sell him their house, triggering a 30-year feud. Enter Charles Crocker, a six foot tall, 300-pound titan of industry who made his fortune
overseeing and financing the construction of the
Central Pacific Railroad. Crocker had but one humble dream, building a tiny
12,000-square foot mansion, buying an entire city block, and getting San Francisco to
build a residential cable car just for the wealthy folks in the area who were also buying entire city blocks. Now, to fully understand the story which took place during the
Gilded Age of U.S. history, I need you to imagine a time
where wealth was concentrated in the hands of the relatively few, the owners of these big businesses. Laborers toiled for hours and hours a day, never reaching anything
like what these owners of these companies had, all while these ultra
rich few felt emboldened to blow their money on monuments to ego. - What's all this? - Oh, this. Oh, I just came from work. I'm a secret agent astronaut millionaire. - Now that you've pictured
such a fantastical scenario that could never possibly
happen today, we must continue. As this railroad baron bought up the block and the project neared completion in 1876, Crocker, the unstoppable force,
met and immovable object, and his name was Nicholas Yung. Yung, a German immigrant
who ran a mortuary, was the sole holdout who
refused to sell his land. So Crocker decided to torment his neighbor by building a 40-foot fence, enclosing the neighbor's house
on three sides out of spite. When Robert Frost wrote, "Good
fences make good neighbors," he clearly never had a
neighbor like Charles Crocker. After he built the spite fence, both sides then took turns
trying to out-spite the other. Crocker ordered his workers
to arrange dynamite blasts so rock debris would pelt the Yung house. Yung threatened to block Crocker's view with a skull and crossbones flag and place a coffin on his roof, ostensibly to advertise his business, but mostly to annoy his rich neighbor. And after Yung and Crocker
died in 1880 and 1888, respectively, their heirs
continued this fight. Efforts to get the city to tear
down the fence went nowhere as the fence technically broke no laws. Spite fence has only became
illegal in California in 1913. And after withstanding a
constitutional challenge in 1920, the modern statute was
finally codified in 1953, providing that, "Any
fence or other structure "in the nature of of a fence "unnecessarily exceeding 10 feet in height "maliciously erected or
maintained for the purpose "of annoying the owner or
occupant of an adjoining property "is a private nuisance." When Yung's widow died in 1902,
the rivalry died with her. Their daughter sold the land to the Crocker descendants in 1904, and the spite fence was torn down in 1905. But all this fighting would
turn out to be pointless as in 1906, the San Francisco earthquake and related fires burned
down the entire neighborhood. Apparently, nature is
just as capable as man of acting out of spite. And just like spite fences
are impractical structures built specifically to annoy, spite houses are generally built with no intention of living there, like the Plum Island Pink House
in Newbury, Massachusetts. According to legend, a wife agreed to a
divorce from her husband on the condition that he build her an exact replica of their current home. But she did not specify where
the house should be built, so the husband built the home in the middle of an isolated salt marsh that used saltwater for plumbing, rendering the unit uninhabitable. And apparently spite runs deep
in the state of Massachusetts because Boston also boasts
its own famous spite house. As the story goes, a man returned from
serving in the Civil War only to find that his brother
had built a large house on their shared land. And since the Civil War
adequately prepared him for brothers being on opposite sides, the spurned sibling built a
10.4-foot wide skinny house to block all sunlight and
view of his brother's home. Now in 2017, the property
was sold to private owners for $900,000. But spite structures are not just a thing of the distant past. Back in 2017, Gaver Nichols, an architect neighbor
in Alexandria, Virginia, decided to build a new garage two feet from neighbors' Paul and
Patrice Linehan's property to block their first floor window. The Linehans missed their 15-day period to object to the garage because Nicholas began construction while they were out of town. And the city later concluded
that the spite garage was not technically illegal. A year later, the Alexandria
city council amended the code to now require all structures
to be at least five feet away from a home with a basement
or first floor window within three feet of the
shared property line. But there are so many ways that you can spite your neighbors, as illustrated by one
Michigan man and Vermont man who individually decided to construct the ultimate symbol of
spite, a giant middle finger. In Michigan, strip club
entrepreneur Alan Markovitz purchased the home next to his ex-wife, then built a 12-foot high spotlit bonze middle finger
sculpture in his backyard. Markovitz claims his wife had
an affair with someone he knew and felt compelled to spend $7,000 for the chance to flip them off every day. Markovitz is no stranger
to making enemies, having been famously shot
twice, once in the face, had a mob contract taken out on his life, and had an ex-girlfriend
drive a Pontiac Fiero through one of his clubs. And similarly in Westford, Vermont, business owner Ted Pelkey
had reached the boiling point after fighting an 11-year battle against the town's
development review board, which had repeatedly denied
his building permit application for an 8,000-square foot garage. Mr. Pelkey had previously
expressed his displeasure in less than legal ways, like in 2011 when he
allegedly threatened to shoot a town official if he
stepped on his property. - Some people in my situation would have probably went and bought a gun, but instead I said, "Well, I'd rather just
put up a big middle finger "in the front yard and just
tell them what I think of them." - Years later, Mr. Pelkey
found a not quite unique, but slightly less threatening
way to express his displeasure with the town officials. He spent $4,000 on a
700-pound, chainsaw-carved, wooden middle finger
perched atop a 16-foot pole. Although one might think
that this would qualify as a spite structure or
even a public nuisance as it flips off the whole town, the government apparently
could not do anything about it. That's because the middle finger does not advertise a product or service so it does not fall under
Vermont's billboard law. Instead, it likely
qualifies as public artwork protected under the First Amendment. The town has fought for
Pelkey to take it down, but the middle finger remains. And it inspired a short
film, "A Very Large Gesture." Now, if your neighbor
sets up a giant fence that you can't get around, you won't be able to shop for groceries. But you can spite them by
having your meals delivered from Hello Fresh. Now, I'm a do-it-yourself
person, and I have to say I was initially pretty
skeptical about Hello Fresh. I'm a pretty good cook, so I didn't think that I needed any help, but I actually loved it. Even for an experienced cook, Hello Fresh delivers new
ingredients and recipes that I'd never try on my own. And as the weather gets cold, you'll experience comforting
home cooked meals, like chicken ramen with shoyu broth and turkey ragu gnocchi. And I don't know about you, but I would never attempt those on my own. And everything I've
gotten from Hello Fresh is insanely delicious, easy
to cook, and really healthy. So if you feel like you've
been cooking the same thing over and over again at home, Hello Fresh is a great solution. And there are 50 menu and market items to choose from every week, including vegetarian, calorie
smart, and gourmet options, so you have plenty of variety. And it's not just meals. Their marketplace gives
you a ton of ad-ons for breakfast, desserts,
and seasonal snacks, like Pillsbury pumpkin cookie dough. And it saves time too. I usually increase the size
of my Hello Fresh serving so I can enjoy the leftovers for lunch. And of course, everything was
delivered straight to my door so I didn't even have to do any shopping. The produce actually gets you
faster than a grocery store, so it arrives at peak
freshness and flavor. And it cuts out meal planning so the recipes only take 20 to 30 minutes, literally less time to cook than it would normally take
to do the shopping itself. And plus, it's incredibly sustainable. Since the ingredients are pre-portioned, there's less prep, less wasted food, and the packaging is almost
entirely made from recyclable or recycled content. Hello Fresh's carbon footprint
is actually 25% lower than that of meals made
from store-bought groceries. So if you would like to try Hello Fresh, and you've got to try these meals, you can go to hellofresh.com
and use the code LegalEagle14 for up to 14 free meals
and three free gifts. Yes, you can actually get 14 free meals, and that includes free shipping. Or you can just click on the link below. So again, for up to 14
free meals and three gifts, go to hellofresh.com and
use the code LegalEagle14, or just click on the link
that's on screen right now or in the description. Plus, clicking on that link
really helps out this channel. And while you're at it, click
on this playlist over here with all of my other legal stories. So click on this playlist
or I'll see you in court.
