Skip to main content
· 10/8/1917

Clouse v. Crow

Citations

  • 68 Pa. Super. 248
  • 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 105

Syllabus

<p>Every man has the right to the natural use and enjoyment of his own property, and if whilst lawfully in such use and enjoyment without negligence or malice on his part, an unavoidable loss occurs to his neighbor, it is damnum absque injuria.</p> <p>Discharge of mine water, either by drift or from a lower level by a shaft, does not impose liability for injury to a neighbor’s property if the same is done without negligence or malice.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for injuries to property caused by the flow of mine water, the burden of proof is on the defendant to show that the natural use of his property which caused the injury was unavoidable and could not have been prevented, except by an expenditure which would be substantially the deprivation of the use of one’s property. If the defendant meets this burden, the plaintiff to recover must show that there was negligence or malice.</p> <p>■ In an action to recover damages for injuries to land, it appeared that the plaintiff was the owner of a farm of twenty-four acres. Immediately adjoining his farm, and located on a higher level, the defendant on his property opened a coal operation twenty-five feet from the plaintiff’s land. This was done by a drift in a westerly direction, with the dip of the coal. The water percolating through the .coal accumulated in the interior of the mine. The drift or pit opening was higher than this water level and prevented its flow by gravity out of the pit mouth. A vein of fire-clay lay immediately below the coal and formed a water tight basin, which prevented the water in its natural flow from further percolation to the surface. To allow drainage, the defendant dug a small ditch along side of his mine track. This permitted the water to flow by gravity from the interior of the mine to the .surface on his ground, thence to the' plaintiff’s ground, and being acidulous it destroyed the vegetation on about a half an acre of plaintiff’s ground. There was no actual evidence that the

Judges: Head, Henderson, Iart, Kephart, Kepi, Lady, Porter, Trexler, Williams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.