Couple demands halt to neighbor's smoking

Akron Beacon Journal ^ | 1/23/04 | Phil Trexler

[mylife]

Couple demands halt to neighbor's smoking Restraining order sought over nuisance to health By Phil Trexler Beacon Journal staff writer

Robert Zangrando has had it up to his chest, nose and eyes with his neighbor's smoking and he's taking her to court to get her to quit.

Zangrando, a retired University of Akron history professor who lives in Stow, was in Summit County court Thursday with his wife and lawyer.

Together they are seeking a restraining order against his next-door neighbor, Nicole Kuder, 28, that would prohibit her from smoking outdoors within 30 feet of her condominium.

Zangrando, 71, and his wife, UA instructor Lisa A. Pace, contend the smoking affects their health and has become a nuisance.

Before the hearing, Kuder said, ``I have tried to accommodate them, and this is the result.''

The couple's attorney, Ed Gilbert, called the situation an emergency and wanted Common Pleas Judge Marvin Shapiro to rule immediately on the restraining order request. Shapiro declined because Kuder came to court without an attorney.

Akron attorney Tom Adgate was retained by Kuder just before the hearing and was unable to attend. Shapiro delayed ruling until the hearing resumes Tuesday with Kuder and her attorney.

Kuder and Zangrando have been neighbors in a condominium complex on Higby Drive for about two years. Their two-story units are separated only by a shared wall. They share a front porch, and a wooden fence separates their back doors.

Zangrando said his neighbor's cigarette smoking is apparent whenever he opens a window or steps outside his home. He said the fumes compromise his health, causing him to wheeze and cough.

He said he suffers from lung problems, including emphysema, and has had asthma in the past. He said the smoking is such that he is reluctant to let his dog or two cats outside.

``It hits you right away, the minute you walk out the door. It catches me, I start coughing, I know she's smoking, I can see she's smoking visually, and I can get the effects of the smoke when I inhale what should be fresh air in my own back patio,'' Zangrando told the judge.

Kuder rents the condo she and her family live in and is not permitted to smoke inside the unit. Zangrando and Pace have owned their unit since marrying in 1996.

``It's a constant reality. She's out there smoking, and I have been appealing to her since she first moved: Please, if you're going smoke, would you move away from the house because the fumes come in our house, and we no longer have discretionary use of our house,'' Zangrando told the judge.

He said he has tried for more than a year to convince Kuder to smoke elsewhere, to no avail. He said he tried to reach an agreement in October, but Kuder and her husband, who does not smoke, refused to sign.

Kuder said Zangrando wanted her to walk to a nearby parking lot to smoke. She said he snoops on her, photographs her movements and has yelled at her to ``go, kill my family'' with her cigarettes.

``I tried to be nice and go out back and compromise, but they constantly harass us,'' Kuder said outside court. ``There have been times when I've had friends over, and he comes out screaming at us. It bothers me, but at the same time, I try to be a respectful smoker.''

[Paved Paradise]

You are wrong. I won't even waste my time explaining why you are wrong, but just because YOU can't smell the stuff or are bothered doesn't mean you shouldn't have compassion. I see a great lack of compassion here.

[CSM]

"No, you failed to understand the answer. Actually you changed the question you thought I was answering. I did answer the original question, you just couldn't understand the answer."

This was the statement: "By his reasoning many boomers should have birth defects since they were born to parents who probably smoked.Smokers were 50% of the population then and the chances are good that at least one parent smoked."

You responded with: "Let me give you a link: http://www.pcrm.org/issues/Ethics_in_Human_Research/ethics_human_birthdefects.html and then a quote from that link: "If smoking during pregnancy were eliminated, infant mortality could be reduced by 10% and LBW by 25%."

We have not seen a decline in birth defects that is consistent with the decline in the smoking population. If the statement you point to was fact, we should be able to see the correlation. Instead you spew propoganda as fact.

That is not an answer to the question. It is a failed attempt to answer the question.

"You try to conclude this but only through very invalid logic, once again demonstrating the negative correlation between smoking and intelligence."

You provided the link as an answer, I provided additional information on that link that would end up with ALL WOMEN RECEIVING PRENATAL CARE. Regardless of health coverage. That means that it would be funded by the public. In order to reduce birthdefects prenatal care at a 100% rate would be necessary. (according to the info YOU provided) That means you would support it. The conclusion to that is that you would support a national health care initiative!

Are you picking bits of info and discounting the rest of the information? Probably, you seem to take the same approach with regards to private property rights.

"You have missed the point entirely—no one woman can have enough babies to produce a statistically valid sample. A large number of women can produce statistically valid samples."

Well, then let's see the statistically valid samples! Provide the information that correlates the decline in smoking to the decline in birth defects. Then provide the information that ties it to smoking, rather than medical improvements or genetics. You won't be able to.

"It is this type of insulting & idiotic blather which causes me to leave."

It may be insulting to you, but it is factual. You make claims, state falsehoods as facts then claim you are leaving the thread. That is the typical leftist approach to debate, why deny it? If we make you uncomfortable, you should check out DU, they take the same approach to debate.

"You are free to smoke, just as you are free to waive your arms in the air. Your freedom to waive your arms ends at the tip of my nose. Your freedom to have your smoke bother me ends at my property line."

Wrong. You have to show that the behavior is causing you harm. You can't. Given your position, I would be able to call the government to ensure that you don't wave your hands in the air. It bothers me.

"The real problem is that smokers are the leftists. They want to create a nuisance for the rest of society in order to indulge their own pleasures and then want the rest of society to bear the cost of their nuisance."

You don't even bother to claim harm anymore. Instead you claim that the person that believes in liberty and private property is the leftist. You claim that the use of government force to ensure that you don't have to encounter a nuisance is conservative. You need to rethink your position, given the chance you will soon be losing the ability to do something you enjoy because it is a nuisance to your neighbor.

"You want to impose your will on me me by forcing me to accept the costs & burden of your smoke."

What costs and burden? You have failed to provide any proof of any cost or any burden. You fall back on the offensiveness and nuisance arguments. These do not constitute a cost or burden! Instead you support forcing your preferences on the rest of society.

"Over the years that the government protected your "right" to smoke almost anywhere,..."

The government never "protected" the right to smoke anywhere, they never required that all "public" places allow smoking. They left that choice up to the property owner and I agreed with that. Why tell another lie?

"Despite trampling the rights on non-smokers."

What rights were trampled upon? Were they forced to go onto any privately owned property?

"Now that we have started to realize the consequences of smoking, smokers are still demanding the "right" to pollute. Well, the rest of us are fighting back. And winning."

What consequences. The results of every study are ambigous at best. No one would claim that smoking is healthy, but the "facts" that are spread around are not true either. Instead, the actual consequences are not known.

In addition, this statement really lets us know the true agenda that you have. The conversation is about SHS and the potential "risks" of exposure. Now you turn it into a "consequences of smoking" discussion. You would rather control the behavior of all others to the point that they would not be allowed to smoke. Regardless of any SHS exposure you may suffer.

[CSM]

"We KNOW secondhand smoke causes problems."

What problems. Show us the studies.

[cyborg]

I don't smoke BUT since you brought it up... one person's odiferous perfume is MY constant sneezing, watery eyed allergy but I'm not outlawing cheap a$$ walmart cologne.

[CSM]

"I've even had a nice drive on a beautiful day ruined because the loser in front of me is puffing away and I can smell it. My advice to all the smoking whiners is JUST SAY NO and quit trying to make us out to be the bad guys. You wouldn't want to be smelling someone's crackpipe nor would you want to be around someone cleaning with noxious fumes. Well guess what?"

Yep, those nice beautiful drives ruined by smoking is a reason to restrict the use of private property. My quite time sitting in my front yard was ruined by the smell of your exhaust, why do you think you have the right to ruin my day. We better ban any leisure driving!

While we are at it we better ban cleaning, those noxious fumes stink and it ruins my day!

[Lady Jag]

SHOOT THEM!
It's what they really want.

[JoJo Gunn]

Leisure driving, from someone who chose the moniker "Paved Paradise", no less.

I sense another Perfect one who has it's own particular cravings, in this case a verbal thrashing to within an inch of it's life for it's hypocrisy. But I'm growing tired of the "I'm better than you are" types who in twisted fashion waltz in here seeking a Father/Confessor. I banish it also from the ideological gene pool.

[Mears]

I,like your mother,smoked and had five healthy ,normal birth-weight, babies.

When I packed my little suitcase to go to the hospital for delivery (we stayed 5 days at that time),the first thing I packed were my cigarettes.

Ah,the good old days,when people believed in "live and let live".

[LisaMalia]

My advice to all the smoking whiners is JUST SAY NO

My advice to you is to read the article more carefully. "Love Thy Neighbor"? This "nutty professor" is stalking this woman. He should be arrested.

loser in front of me is puffing away and I can smell it.

Did someone force you in the car with them? If not, who's the loser here????????????

[Mears]

I used to live in a condo and your ridiculous suggestion that she just put up a little garden shed and smoke in it really makes me laugh.

I doubt if the condo association would allow it,just as they don't allow a lot of things.

[Freedom2specul8]

Live and let live? What's that mean? (snicker snort)


People who have never smoked will never understand..regardless of their own bad habits..whatever they may be. The exhaust fumes are a perfect example..we are addicted to our cars..we can't live without them. No one could possibly tolerate the smell from horses exhaust either. :-\

[CSM]

Yep, but apparently they allow smoking on the common grounds!

[MississippiMan]

You are wrong. I won't even waste my time explaining why you are wrong, but just because YOU can't smell the stuff or are bothered doesn't mean you shouldn't have compassion. I see a great lack of compassion here.

I have NO idea where you drew your conclusions from. I LOATHE the smell of cigarette smoke. LOATHE it. I also hate the smell of certain spices when cooking. And dogs pooping. But I also realize that other people have different tastes and opinions, likes and dislikes; I understand that I'm not the center of the universe, that I don't have the right to inflict my preferences on everyone around me.

MM

[Mears]

The issue of smoking outdoors probably never came up until this jerk arrived.

The deck on which she was smoking and the driveway to the unit's garage are considered common property but the owner(or tenant) of the unit has "exclusive use".

This idiot wouldn't be happy no matter what the smoker did,he just wants her gone.

[CSM]

"This idiot wouldn't be happy no matter what."

nuff said!

[Freedom2specul8]

At our last house, we had a neighbor who enjoyed cigars..his wife wouldn't let him smoke in the house, so he spent time on the deck. Maybe once a week.

If I was outside, I just went back in until he was finished. It didn't bother me....it's all a give and take thing. We had 2 dogs that barked during inconvenient times...such as when we were gone. BUT...if they had company outside, I brought my dogs in out of courtesy.

The guy in question.."Robert Zangrando" should have known that moving into condos forces one to be connected EVEN CLOSER in proximity to the neighbors. He chose to live there. There are other living options that could have been more suitable to his needs. This is just ridiculous.

[JoJo Gunn]

And you are the kind I willingly chose years ago not to be a militant and go outdoors.

[LisaMalia]

These are things/people that contribute to any stress-related health issues I may have now or in the future.

Pompous, obnoxious people
Domestic violence
Liberal rhetoric
Babs Streisand, Alec Baldwin, Michael Moore, and other Hollyweirders
Coffee drinkers who OD and talk incessantly
Men and women who bathe in cologne/perfume
Defense attorneys who get rich off of making sure famous murderers/rapists/child abusers go free
People who bilk the welfare system, and take my money when they could be out working
Liberal politicians who promote the welfare system
The so called "Kennedy legacy"
Bleeding hearts who degrade smokers, while they pollute the air with the cars they drive
Farm Aid, for being a fraud
Environmentalists who put people out of jobs
PETA for putting animals before people
The ACLU for defending causes such as NAMBLA
Racism
Unpatriotic Americans

These things/people are inflicted on me by watching or reading the news, or just living my everyday life. And that is just the beginning of my list.

[JoJo Gunn]

It's all pretty surreal sometimes, huh?

[TexasCajun]

Maybe the Liberal retired professor is living too close to GOODYEAR!! ..huh, maybe?