Werrman v. Raber

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

Werrman v. Raber

1 Hosea's Rep. 443

DecidedJuly 1, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Hosea's Rep. 443 (Werrman v. Raber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Werrman v. Raber, 1 Hosea's Rep. 443 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Hosea, J.

Heard on demurrer to petition.

The action is for damages under the common law for ' removal by adjacent owner of the ancient lateral support of plaintiff’s lots.

The common law rule in this behalf is not abrogated in Ohio. This time-honored rule, however, was limited in operation to lands and did not include liability with respect to artificial burdens, such as buildings, placed on lands by the owner. Our statute extends this liability to include buildings and walls under certain conditions. It also modifies the rule to the. extent of providing for the grading of lots to conform to the established grade of streets on which lots abut. But the extension and modification do not abrogate the rule and it is still in force. The language in Hall v. Kleeman, 7 N. P., p. 201, is in this respect inaccurate and misleading.

Demurrer overruled with leave to answer in thirty days.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hosea, J.

Heard on demurrer to petition.

The action is for damages under the common law for ' removal by adjacent owner of the ancient lateral support of plaintiff’s lots.

The common law rule in this behalf is not abrogated in Ohio. This time-honored rule, however, was limited in operation to lands and did not include liability with respect to artificial burdens, such as buildings, placed on lands by the owner. Our statute extends this liability to include buildings and walls under certain conditions. It also modifies the rule to the. extent of providing for the grading of lots to conform to the established grade of streets on which lots abut. But the extension and modification do not abrogate the rule and it is still in force. The language in Hall v. Kleeman, 7 N. P., p. 201, is in this respect inaccurate and misleading.

Demurrer overruled with leave to answer in thirty days.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Hosea's Rep. 443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/werrman-v-raber-ohsuperctcinci-1907.