If a court orders your neighbor to keep certain things away from your property line, the neighbor must follow the specific terms, and leaving a prohibited object in place can mean contempt and an order to pay your legal fees. Here the Appeals Court affirmed a Superior Court judgment holding a property owner in contempt for leaving a huge pile of excavated dirt near the boundary, in violation of a permanent injunction the Supreme Judicial Court shaped years earlier. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
The two sides own neighboring properties and have a long history of litigation. Between 1999 and 2003, the neighbor dumped construction debris along the boundary and took other steps meant to annoy the homeowners, including placing portable toilets near their pool and landing a helicopter near the line. That led to a permanent injunction, modified by the Supreme Judicial Court in Rattigan v. Wile, 445 Mass. 850 (2006). Among other terms, it bars the neighbor from leaving unattended any object more than six feet tall within forty feet of the homeowners’ boundary, except reasonable vegetation. Around 2022, a construction company working under the neighbor’s building permit left a pile of dirt and sand about fifteen feet high and twenty-five feet across, within seven feet of the line. The homeowners’ lawyer asked for its removal in April 2023, the homeowners filed for contempt in May, and the pile was removed about one day before the scheduled hearing.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed in Horvitz v. Wile, No. 23-P-1451 (Mass. App. Ct. August 26, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
The contempt standard. A civil contempt finding needs clear and convincing evidence that someone disobeyed a clear and unequivocal command. Birchall, petitioner, 454 Mass. 837 (2009). The trial judge’s contempt finding is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
The order was clear. The neighbor argued that the injunction only barred unreasonable interference with the homeowners’ property, and that the six foot, forty foot language was just an example. The court rejected that reading. The height and distance rule is a clear and unequivocal command on its own. A person bound by an injunction is responsible for checking whether planned conduct is prohibited. Eldim, Inc. v. Mullen, 47 Mass. App. Ct. 125 (1999). If he thinks the order is ambiguous, he can ask the court to clarify before acting. Coyne Indus. Laundry of Schenectady, Inc. v. Gould, 359 Mass. 269 (1971). The injunction also expressly let the neighbor seek a modification if he got lawful authority to build, but he did not ask for one until after the contempt judgment.
The violation was willful. The neighbor said he did not create the pile himself. The court found that did not matter. He controlled his property, the pile sat there about three months, it stayed about six more weeks after the homeowners asked for its removal, and it was moved only on the eve of the hearing. Those facts supported the judge’s finding of willful disobedience.
Attorney’s fees. A contempt judgment may include reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of enforcing the order. Manchester v. Department of Envtl. Quality Eng’g, 381 Mass. 208 (1980). The judge carefully reviewed the fee request and reduced it, which was within his broad discretion. The Appeals Court declined to award attorney’s fees for the appeal.
What this means for you
If you have an injunction against a neighbor, its specific terms matter. A clear, measurable rule, such as a height limit and a setback from the line, is easier to enforce than a general promise not to interfere. You do not have to prove every violation is unreasonable when the order draws a bright line.
If you are the one under an injunction, this case is a warning. Here the owner was held responsible even though his contractor made the pile, because he controlled the property and let it stay. Fixing the problem only after a contempt complaint is filed does not erase the violation, and it may be used as evidence that the violation was willful. If you need to do something the order seems to forbid, ask the court for a modification first.
What to do now
- Keep a copy of any injunction or court order that covers your property line, and read its exact terms.
- Photograph and measure any object or condition you believe violates the order, with dates.
- Send a written request through counsel asking for the violation to be fixed, and keep a copy.
- If the violation continues, ask about filing a complaint for civil contempt and a request for attorney’s fees.
- If you are bound by an order and plan construction, tell your contractor its limits in writing and seek a modification before work starts.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. These cases move on short deadlines.
