Opinion
February 27, 1905.
PRESENT: Douglas, C.J., Dubois, and Blodgett, JJ.
(1) Surface Water. Change of Grade. Municipal Corporations. The collecting of surface water and discharging it upon land of plaintiff by a municipality, through a change of grade, is a continuing nuisance, for which plaintiff may maintain an action, although the property damaged was acquired subsequent to the change of grade.
TRESPASS ON THE CASE. The declaration alleged that defendant town negligently graded a public highway and constructed gutters therein so as to collect and conduct in confined channels large streams of surface water which did not flow upon the land prior to the grading of said highway, and would not have flowed thereon at any time had the grade not been changed and discharged the said water in and upon the land. Heard on demurrer to declaration, and demurrer overruled.
Joseph C. Moore, for plaintiff.
Albert B. Crafts and Augustine T.L. Ledwidge, for defendant.
The objection raised by the demurrer, that the action can not be maintained because the plaintiff became the owner of the premises subsequent to the time when the grade of the highway was changed and the gutters were constructed, is unsound. The facts alleged, if true, constitute a continuing nuisance, and an action quoties toties may be maintained. Wells v. New Haven Northampton Co., 151 Mass. 46; Mississippi Tennessee R.R. Co. v. Archibald, 67 Miss. 38; O'Brien v. City of St. Paul, 18 Minn. 176. In other respects the case stated is not dissimilar to the case stated in Johnson v. White, 26 R.I. 207. And see also Hathaway v. Osborne, 25 R.I. 251.
Demurrer overruled.