Opinion ID: 1767670
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Previous Litigation

Text: In 1951, appellant filed suit in Chancery, claiming appellee was obstructing Timmons Street, which was on the south side of appellant's land and the north side of appellees's land. By cross-complaint, appellee sought damages, claiming that appellant had:    constructed three stock ponds on his said lands which have created reservoirs for natural drainage. That said ponds empty into each other and finally to the pond located in the Southeast part of plaintiff's property. That at said pond plaintiff has constructed a spillway which permits water to run over and upon the lands of said defendant, to the damage of the defendant, for which he seeks to recover the sum of $500.00 as damages. That said impounding of natural drainage and diverting the flow of the same over and upon the lands of said defendant is a nuisance and cannot be abated in an action at law, except by a multiplicity of suits. The appellant denied the allegations of the cross-complaint; and a Chancery trial resulted in a decree: (1) enjoining appellee from closing Timmons Street; and (2) finding that the waters which appellant had impounded were only surface waters. The Chancellor's written opinion on the latter point reads: The Court finds that although the plaintiff is impounding surface water on his lands and is diverting the flow thereof, that the defendant proved no damages as a residt of the diversion. (Italics our own.)