Stoecker v. City of Cedarburg
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Ozaukee county: Maetim- L. Lueok, Circuit Judge. This is an action to recover damages caused hy surface water which it is alleged the city gathered into artificial water channels and discharged upon the plaintiff’s land, and for the abatement of a nuisance. The plaintiff and her husband were the owners of the land here involved.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Ozaukee county: Maetim- L. Lueok, Circuit Judge. This is an action to recover damages caused hy surface water which it is alleged the city gathered into artificial water channels and discharged upon the plaintiff’s land, and for the abatement of a nuisance. The plaintiff and her husband were the owners of the land here involved. Since the cause has been tried in the trial court the husband has died and the action is continued in the plaintiff’s name. It appears that the plaintiff owns land situated on Wurthmann street in the city of Gedarburg.…
1Opinion of the CourtSiebecker, J.
We have examined the record and find the evidence amply sustains the findings of fact of the trial court. The trial court properly held that the acts of the city in constructing the drain and improving the highway adjacent to plaintiff’s premises did not increase the flow of the surface water onto the plaintiff’s land and did not create a nuisance.
The city had the right to improve the “Plank Road” and the streets in the city and to change the natural course of the surface water by such improvement within the limits of the highways, even though such improvement changed the flow of such water…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Champion v. Town of CrandonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- Merkel v. Town of GermantownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by1 opinion
- Crystal Spring Brook Trout Hatchery Co. v. Village of LomiraWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917