Case, for damages to the plaintiff’s land. Trial by jury and verdict for the defendant. Transferred from the September term, 1904, of the superior court by Chamberlin, J. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to prove that rain falling on the defendant’s premises is collected by the roof of his block, flows therefrom over and upon the plaintiff’s land, and undermines the foundation of the latter’s building.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1905-05-02
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1974
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
¶1
The owner of land may put it to any use which is reasonable, considering his interest and that of the other persons affected by it.
Ladd
v.
Brick Co.,
68 N. H. 185, 186. The test to determine whether a particular use is reasonable is to inquire whether or not it is such a use as the ordinary man would make of his premises.
Horan
v.
Byrnes,
72 N. H. 93, 97, 100. The foundation on which the rule rests has been recently re-examined
(Franklin
v.
Durgee,
71 N. H. 186) and the rule reaffirmed, so the further consideration of the question at this time can serve no useful purpose.
