City of Jacksonville v. Doan

Citations

• 145 Ill. 23
• 33 N.E. 878

Syllabus

<p>1. Nuisance—created by the discharge of a sewer—liability of city. Where a city constructs a sewer so as to empty the sewage and filth carried therein into a creek outside of the city limits, it must see that the contents of the sewer when so emptied will flow off without endangering the health of that locality; and if there exist obstructions preventing the flow of the filth, it will devolve upon the city to remove them.</p> <p>2. A city has the right to construct a sewer for the purpose of carrying off the sewage of the city; but if the substances discharged from the mouth of a sewer are injurious to the residence of a citizen, he will have his remedy for such damages as he has thereby sustained. The city has no right to empty the contents of such sewers at a point inside or outside of its limits, where it may endanger the health or life of a citizen, and escape liability.</p> <p>3. In such case the fact that obstructions are allowed in the creek below the place where the sewer empties into it, regardless of who placed the obstructions in the creek, or whose duty it was to remove them, will not deprive the plaintiff of a right of action against the city.</p> <p>4. Same—xoant of care by plaintiff. In an action on the case against a city for emptying a sewer into a creek above and near the plaintiff’s residence, and thereby injuring the plaintiff by offensive odors and stench arising from the filth thrown into the creek, the plaintiff must not, by his own want of ordinary care, materially contribute to the injury. If he suffers obstructions to accumulate in the creek on his own land, and they are the cause of his injury, he can not recover.</p> <p>5. Appeals and Writs op Error—error will not always reverse. There is no error in refusing an instruction announcing a correct principle of law, when the same principle appears in other instructions which were given in substance, though in a different form.</p>