Weinman v. De Palma

Citations

• 232 U.S. 571
• 34 S. Ct. 370
• 58 L. Ed. 733
• 1914 U.S. LEXIS 1387

Syllabus

<p>Where the owner of demised premises makes a contract with an adjoining owner for construction of a party wall, which contract cannot be carried out according to its terms without entry upon the demised premises and undermining the tenant’s wall, and the adjoining owner, or his servants, in performing the contract commit such a trespass upon the tenant’s possession and undermine the wall, the contract is evidential of a command or approval of the trespass by the landlord, such as to render him liable severally, or jointly with the adjoining owner, in an action by the tenant for the resulting damages.</p> <p>Where a trespass results in the destruction of a building with consequent interruption of a going business, the loss of future profits— reasonably certain and proved with reasonable exactitude — is a proper element for consideration in awarding compensatory damages.</p> <p>Where the contractor is required to follow instructions of the owner he is not such an independent contractor as to relieve the owner of liability for his acts.</p> <p>The “independent contractor” doctrine does not apply where the work that the contractor does 'amounts in itself to a nuisance or necessarily operates to destroy the property of another.</p>