Crest Chevrolet-Oldsmobile-Cadillac, Inc. v. Willemsen
Supreme Court of Wisconsin
384 N.W.2d 692 (1986)
- Written by Rocco Sainato, JD
Facts
Crest Chevrolet-Oldsmobile-Cadillac, Inc. (Crest) (plaintiff) and Bauer Glass both sit on adjoining pieces of property. In the past, water would run across Crest’s property and flow onto Bauer Glass’ property, as it was lower in elevation. When Bauer Glass was purchased by Willemsen (defendant), he added landfill to the property, raising its elevation above that of Crest’s property. Willemsen also attached a sewer system to the municipal sewer system for $68,348.94. Willemsen encouraged Crest to also connect to the municipal sewer system at a cost of $9,000. Willemsen warned Crest that water would flow onto Crest’s land, and would cause flooding if its property was not connected to the sewer system. Crest did not connect to the sewer system, and its land was subsequently damaged as a result of flooding from runoff. Crest brought an action against Willemsen for damages in the amount of $4,500, and costs associated with connecting with the sewer system, now listed at $11,620. The circuit court ruled in favor of Willemsen because he had warned Crest of the consequences of not connecting to the sewer system. The court also ordered Crest to connect to the system to avoid future damages. On appeal, the court of appeals held in Crest’s favor on the grounds that the improvements by Willemsen blocked the natural flow of water in an unreasonable manner. Willemsen petitioned for certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ceci, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.