TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Barry v. Peterson

Francis J. Barry v. Severen Peterson

Barry v. Peterson, 12 N.W. 181 (Mich. 1882)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 25, 1882
Judges
Campbell, Other
Citations
12 N.W. 18148 Mich. 2631882 Mich. LEXIS 800
Disposition
Reversed.
Cited by 7
Headnotes
Damages f<»’ throwing snow on another’s premises — Barnes dripping. An action lies for such, damages as are caused by snow thrown from one person’s premises upon those of another, although the damages maybe more consequential than direct. But damages cannot be recovered on account of water dripping from ai house on adjacent premises without proof that it was caused by some neglect of duty on the part of the house owner. Underwood Waldron 33 Mich. 239 affirmed.
Summary
Error to Midland. Case. Defendants bring error.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Campbell

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Campbell, J.

Plaintiff sued in a justice’s court to recover for injury caused to his building by rain dripping from defendants’ neighboring house, and by snow thrown between the buildings and on his land from the latter. The chief injury being consequential and not direct, we think there can be no objection to the form of action, which was case.

So far as the damage from snow is concerned there was proof that it was shovelled upon plaintiff’s land from defendants’ house by defendants’ order, and by their servant in the course of his service. We think there was no error in holding defendants liable for this.

But the court did not qualify the liability under all circumstances for the consequences of rain dripping from defendants’ roof, and held it was absolute. This liability does not exist unless it arises from some fault or neglect of duty, and it was so held in Underwood v. Waldron 33 Mich. 239 . Eor this error the judgment must be reversed and a new trial granted.

The other Justices concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →
1901: 11902: 11905: 11914: 11954: 11960: 219012026peak 1960 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Huber v. Stark102 N.W. 12 (Wis. 1905)
  2. Leonard v. Nat Harrison Associates, Inc.122 So. 2d 432 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)
  3. Cribbs v. Stiver147 N.W. 587 (Mich. 1914)
  4. Allen v. Morris Building Co.103 N.W.2d 491 (Mich. 1960)
  5. Muskegon Agency, Inc. v. General Telephone Co.65 N.W.2d 748 (Mich. 1954)
  6. Wyant v. Crouse53 L.R.A. 626 (Mich. 1901)

Most recent

  1. Leonard v. Nat Harrison Associates, Inc.122 So. 2d 432 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)
  2. Allen v. Morris Building Co.103 N.W.2d 491 (Mich. 1960)
  3. Muskegon Agency, Inc. v. General Telephone Co.65 N.W.2d 748 (Mich. 1954)
  4. Cribbs v. Stiver147 N.W. 587 (Mich. 1914)
  5. Huber v. Stark102 N.W. 12 (Wis. 1905)
  6. Miller v. Wilson104 Ill. App. 556 (1902)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Underwood v. Waldron, 33 Mich. 232 (1876) 14

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list