Meat Packing Plant Hypo o Material fact (1) is the park a natural resource (2)the park is being polluted,

d, impaired or destroyed or that the air was being destroyed So now the plaintiff must prove it is a natural resource Evidence to prove the park is a natural resource P has to prove this Or you can prove that the air was getting destroyed Two different theories of the case Pre-trial Hypo and the Jury: o There is an odor-producing meatpacking plant located at the edge of an industrial area across the street from a park. An environmentalist brings suit arguing that the plant violates a new statute making it "unlawful to destroy, impair, or pollute the air or other natural resources." The park and plant were built at the same time. The plant is on the edge of an economically important industrial area. Discovery yields: Five witnesses for the plaintiff who state that the odor makes them sick when they're in the park. The defense has four witnesses stating that the smell doesnt bother them. o Material issues of fact are created by the statute The theory of the case light up the aspects of the statute that are going to count in the case and makes facts become material or not o Does the plaintiff have to pick a theory of the case You can have alternate theories of the case so long as they are not inconsistent It violates the statute in two different ways o Defining what impaired, polluted or destroyed is a legal thing not a fact based thing And first look to precedent and statutes o Only way to know if something is relevant is to identify what is it suppose to prove (what is it gonna more or less likely prove or make probable)