Legal Opinion

Currens v. Sleek

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 1999No. 66830-2PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDurham, J.

— Petitioners Cal and Elsa Currens (the Currenses) seek review of an unpublished Court of Appeals decision affirming the summary judgment dismissal of their complaint against Respondents Irene Sleek and Dennis Stephenson Logging (together, Respondents). At issue is whether liability may arise for property damage caused by an increased flow of surface water onto the Currenses’ property after Sleek clear-cut and graded her land. We hold that the common enemy doctrine shields a landowner from liability for surface water flooding only if the landowner exercises due care in preventing unnecessary…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Morris v. McNicolWashington Supreme Court · 1974
  2. State Ex Rel. Washington State Finance Committee v. MartinWashington Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Phillips v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Heins Implement Co. v. Missouri Highway & Transportation CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1993
  5. Phillips v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1998

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. United States v. MilnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. Grundy v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Grundy v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Currens v. SleekWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Borden v. City of OlympiaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API