Chapter 3 – Reading for Comprehension

Dowdell v. Bloomquist Case Reading and Analysis

Post-Reading Exercise (Multiple Choice Questions)

 After reading Chapter 3 of your textbook and the Dowdell v. Bloomquist case and
opinion on pages 46-48, please answer the following questions and submit your
completed answers to me in Canvas.

 Please use the yellow highlighter tool to highlight your correct answer(s).

 Upload your documents to Canvas by January 25 th at 5:00pm.

STUDENT NAME: Stephanie Dundun

1. How did the appellate court treat the trial court’s version of the facts?
(Point value: 1)

a. In making its decision, the appellate court did not use the trial judge’s
version of the facts because an appellate court always takes a new look at
the facts and determines the credibility of witnesses who testified.

b. In making its decision, the appellate court did not use the trial judge’s
version of the facts because there was proof that the trial court overlooked
material evidence.

c. In making its decision, the appellate court used the trial judge’s version of
the facts because there was no proof that the trial judge misconceived or
overlooked evidence and the appellate court deferred to the trial judge’s
determination of the credibility of witnesses who testified.

d. In making its decision, the appellate court accepted the trial judge’s
version of the facts because an appellate court always accepts a trial
judge’s factual findings.

2. What question was the appellate court asked to decide? If more than one
answer is correct, select all answers that are correct. (Point value: 2)

a. Did the row of trees block the property owner’s view of the ocean?

b. Could the row of trees constitute a “spite fence” or structure?

c. Did the defendant plant the trees with malicious intent?

 d. Did the trial justice improperly overlook the defense that the trees were
planted for the useful purpose of privacy?

3. Which of the following is correct? (Point value: 1)

a. The appellate court disapproved of the outcome of the case at the trial
court level and disagreed with the trial court’s reasoning.

b. The appellate court disapproved of the outcome of the case at the trial
court level but agreed with the trial court’s reasoning.

c. The appellate court approved of the outcome of the case at the trial court
level but disagreed with the trial court’s reasoning.

d. The appellate court approved of the outcome of the case at the trial court
level and agreed with the trial court’s reasoning.

4. Which of the following is not a true statement? If more than one answer
is correct, select all that apply. (Point value: 2)

a. The statutory definition of a lawful fence includes a hedge.

b. A fence that is maliciously and unnecessarily erected to annoy an

adjoining landowner may be enjoined as a private nuisance under the
“spite fence” statute even though it only interferes with the adjoining
landowner’s light and view.

c. A fence that is maliciously erected to annoy an adjoining landowner will

not be enjoined as a private nuisance under the “spite fence” statute if it is
erected in part for a useful purpose.

d. A four-foot fence that is maliciously erected to annoy an adjoining

landowner can be enjoined as a private nuisance under the “spite-fence”
statute.

5. On which of the following facts did the appellate court rely to support its
ruling? (Select from answer a, b, c or d further below.) (Point value: 2)

I. A row of smaller trees already stood between the homes

before the larger trees were planted.

II. Western arborvitae is not a hedge plant.

 III. Defendant planted trees on the property line a day after the
zoning board heard arguments on his request for zoning
approval to build a second story addition to his home.

IV. The trees Defendant planted on the property line grew 45 feet
tall and 60 feet across.

V. The trees Defendant planted on the property line provided his

home with privacy.

a. IV only
b. I and V
c. I, III, and IV
d. All of the above

6. Which of the following statements is correct? If more than one statement

is correct, select all correct statements. (Point value: 2)

a. If the trial justice found that the defendant was credible in his claim that
the trees were planted for a useful purpose of privacy, the planting of the
trees would not meet the definition of a spite fence under the statute.

b. If the trial justice found that the defendant was credible in his claim that
the trees were planted for a useful purpose of privacy, the plaintiff would
not be entitled to remedy, even if the trees satisfied the statutory definition
of a spite fence.

c. If the row of smaller trees did not already exist, the trial justice would
have found the defendant’s useful purpose of privacy claim to be credible.

d. The appellate judge relied on the ruling in the Musumeci case to support
the ruling in this case.

e. The appellate court relied on the findings of facts to distinguish the ruling
in the Musumeci case from the ruling in this case.

Grading Score - Total Points: ___/10