Sowers v. Lowe

Citations

• 5 Sadler 268
• 9 A. 44
• 20 Week. No. 76
• 1887 Pa. LEXIS 616

Syllabus

<p>Tlie natural Row of water from a higher to a lower lot cannot, as a general rule, give a cause of action to one injured, thereby.</p> <p>Plaintiff and defendant owned adjacent lots. Plaintiff’s house was eloseto the line; defendant’s 32 feet from it. The intervening space was sandy,, and sloped from defendant’s house to plaintiff’s. Plaintiff’s cellar was always dry until defendant changed the spouting which had formerly discharged into the street the water from defendant’s house, and turned the-spouts upon the space between the houses. The water then percolated through the sand and plaintiff’s cellar became damp and the house was damaged. Held, that plaintiff had no right of action against defendant for-the damage thus caused.</p> <p>Note. — But the rule is otherwise where there is a diversion by the upper-proprietor from the natural course. Rhoads v. Davidheiser, 133 Pa. 226, 19 Am. St. Rep. 630, 19 Atl. 400; Hays v. Hinkleman, 68 Pa. 324; Miller-v. Lau-baeh, 47 Pa. 154, 86 Am. Dec. 521. As to what may be done with surface water, see the exhaustive discussion of the subject in Farnham on Waters, pp. 2571-2646; as to what may be done with roof water, see the= same author at p. 2581.</p>