From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shuster v. City of Chisholm

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Nov 10, 1938
282 N.W. 135 (Minn. 1938)

Opinion

No. 31,784.

November 10, 1938.

Water and watercourse — pollution — liability of city.

On evidence showing defendant's substantial contribution to pollution of stream flowing by plaintiffs' farm, verdict for damages sustained.

Action in the district court for St. Louis county to recover damages for defendant's wrongful pollution of a stream flowing by plaintiffs' farm. The case was tried before Edwin J. Kenny, Judge, and a jury. Plaintiffs had a verdict of $1,000. Defendant appealed from an order denying its alternative motion for judgment or a new trial. Affirmed.

Frank M. Talus, City Attorney, and John M. Gannon, for appellant.

Austin Wangensteen, for respondents.



Plaintiffs got a verdict assessing their damage for defendant's wrongful pollution by its sewage of Little Swan River, which flows by their farm. Defendant appeals from an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial. The one question on this appeal is whether there is evidence to sustain the verdict.

There is enough proof that the stream was badly polluted by sewage. The principal issue below was whether defendant or the neighboring village of Hibbing was the real tortfeasor. Hibbing discharges its sewage into a tributary stream. The confluence is upstream from plaintiffs' land. In this action the two cities could not be joined. That is because in the creation and continuance of the nuisance they acted as independent, not joint, tortfeasors. Johnson v. City of Fairmont, 188 Minn. 451, 247 N.W. 572.

It is needless to rehearse evidence. On plaintiffs' part there was much testimony, an important item of it coming from a sanitary engineer, showing the very substantial extent to which defendant's sewage contributed to the nuisance as a proximate and contributing cause of plaintiffs' damage. That is enough, with the verdict, to establish its liability.

The order is affirmed.


Summaries of

Shuster v. City of Chisholm

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Nov 10, 1938
282 N.W. 135 (Minn. 1938)
Case details for

Shuster v. City of Chisholm

Case Details

Full title:MARTIN SHUSTER, SR. AND ANOTHER v. CITY OF CHISHOLM

Court:Supreme Court of Minnesota

Date published: Nov 10, 1938

Citations

282 N.W. 135 (Minn. 1938)
282 N.W. 135

Citing Cases

Huber v. City of Blue Earth

Neither counsel has found a case directly in point on this question, but the liability of cities for…