Court Opinion

ID: 9733442
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 17:07:51.680411+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:41.547792
License: Public Domain

COOPER, Justice,
concurring.
In this case, the defendants dumped 14,-500 cubic yards of waste material on the plaintiffs’ properties. The jury found that the cost to remove the waste material and thus restore the properties to their original condition was $72,500. The defendants produced an “expert” who testified that the presence of the waste material did not affect the fair market value of the plaintiffs’ properties. Justice Johnstone’s dissent posits that a literal interpretation of State Property & Buildings Commission v. H.W. Miller Construction Co., Ky., 385 S.W.2d 211 (1964) and Newsome v. Billips, Ky.App., 671 S.W.2d 252 (1984) mandates a directed verdict for the defendants in accordance with the opinion of their expert — and he may be right, though a directed verdict was held improper in both cases. But if that is the law of this Commonwealth, it ought to be changed. Since those cases are products of the judicial branch, this is the proper forum in which to effect that change. I would limit the holdings in those cases to their facts, ie., damage to structures caused by faulty construction, blasting or the like, not damage to unimproved real estate caused by dumping. If the majority opinion is a departure from a common law rule that a property *80owner cannot recover the cost of removing waste material illegally dumped on his property absent proof that the presence of the waste material has diminished the fair market value of the property, then I am proud to be riding on that train.
LAMBERT, C.J., and STUMBO, J., join this concurring opinion.