Case Name: KLEIN v. POWER
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1920-12-21
Citations: 212 Mich. 701
Docket Number: Docket No. 31
Parties: KLEIN v. POWER.
Judges: Moore, C. J., and Steere, Brooke, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JX, concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 212
Pages: 701–702

Head Matter:
KLEIN v. POWER.
Waters and Watercourses — Injunction—Pollution of Stream.
On a bill by tbe owners of tbe subservient estate to enjoin tbe pollution of tbe waters of a creek traversing plaintiffs’ land, evidence held, insufficient to sustain tbe material allegations of tbe bill.
Appeal from Oakland; Rockwell (Kleber P.), J.
Submitted October 6, 1920.
(Docket No. 31.)
Decided December 21, 1920.
Bill by Adele L. Klein, individually, and as executrix of the will of Frederick J. Klein, deceased, and others, against Lemuel A. Power and others to enjoin an alleged nuisance. From a decree dismissing the bill, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
James H. Pound, for plaintiffs.
Pelton & McGee, for defendants.

Opinion:
Clark, J.
Plaintiffs, owners of land traversed by a creek, not disputing that their land has the servitude of waters collected arid carried by a tile drain in the upper and adjoining land of defendants, complain, seeking relief by injunction, that defendants have by the tile drain cast into the creek and upon the premises of plaintiffs, to their damage, malodorous, noisome and deleterious matter, particularly by connecting the tile draip with a toilet room and sink in the dwelling of defendants. After answer and hearing the circuit court dismissed the bill of complaint and plaintiffs have appealed. In plaintiffs' behalf there was testimony of witnesses to the presence of the aforesaid matter in the creek and in a catch basin which is a part of the tile drain, which testimony was contradicted by witnesses for defendants. Defendants had neither toilet room nor sink in their dwelling. Plaintiffs were mistaken in their allegation in that regard. We think the record fails to sustain the material allegations of the bill and we are confirmed in this opinion by the action of the trial judge who saw the witnesses and heard their testimony.
The decree is affirmed, with costs to the defendants.
Moore, C. J., and Steere, Brooke, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JX, concurred.