Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): § 158 cmt. m (“An unprivileged remaining on land in another’s possession is a continuing trespass for the entire time during which the actor wrongfully remains.”). The continuing presence of MCI’s fiber optic cables on Browning’s land therefore could give rise to a claim of continuing trespass, assuming that the original installation of the cables was tor-tious (which MCI denies). Nevertheless, even assuming that MCI committed a continuing trespass, any such claim was discharged by confirmation of MCI’s plan of reorganization, due to the expansive scope of the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “claim” and Browning’s failure to allege any relevant post-confirmation conduct or unforeseeable damages. It is well-established under Kansas law Co., 64 Kan. 403, 403, 67 P. 831, 833 (Kan.1902) (<HOLDING>). Whether Browning would have been required 
 Holding statements: (A) recognizing fundamental principle that utility rates are set for the future and not the past (B) recognizing that when a defendants negligence causes bodily injury the plaintiff can recover damages for past present and future medical expenses bodily injury and emotional distress (C) holding plaintiff must move before public interests are involved to bring suit for ejectment but allowing single action for past present and future damages (D) holding that prejudgment interest may properly be added to damage awards for past lost wages medical expenses that have been incurred and past pain and suffering but not future loss of earnings future medical expenses andor future pain and suffering (E) holding that debtor was liable to the commonwealth for past and future cleanup costs
Output (English): holding that prejudgment interest may properly be added to damage awards for past lost wages medical expenses that have been incurred and past pain and suffering but not future loss of earnings future medical expenses andor future pain and suffering