Citation. L.R. 3 H.L. 330 (1868) Brief Fact Summary. Defendant built a reservoir on top of plaintiff’s old mine. After the reservoir was completed, the mine shaft collapsed and flooded plaintiff’s mine. Synopsis of Rule of Law. If a person brings a dangerous thing onto the land, and then the dangerous thing escapes, then the person is liable for resulting damages automatically. ...
Search Results
Rylands v. Fletcher
Citation. L.R. 3 H.L. 330 (House of Lords, 1868) Brief Fact Summary. Rylands owned a reservoir that sat on top of abandoned mining shafts that were filled with subsoil. Water from the reservoir burst into the shafts and travelled to mines used by Fletcher, flooding them. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person who for his own purposes brings anything onto his land that is likely to do damage if it escapes is prima facie liable for all damages that are a natural consequence of its escape. ...
Rylands v. Fletcher
CitationCourt of Exchequer, 3 H. & C. 774, 159 Eng. Rep. 737 (1865); Exchequer Chamber, L.R. 1 Ex. 265 (1866); House of Lords, L.R. 3 H.L. 330 (1868) Brief Fact Summary. The coal mine of Fletcher (Plaintiff) was flooded when Rylands (Defendant) built a reservoir on his neighboring land. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A defendant is strictly liable for harm done by any escaping, non-natural thing that he brought onto his land. ...
Rylands v. Fletcher
Citation. [1868] All E.R. 1 Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff’s mine was flooded by the defendant’s reservoir of water. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Any person who brings onto his land something capable of and likely to cause harm for his own purposes is liable for it if harm does, in fact, result. ...
Rylands v. Fletcher
CitationState ex rel. Fletcher v. Ruhe, 52 P. 274, 24 Nev. 251, 1898 Nev. LEXIS 8 (Nev. 1898) Brief Fact Summary. Water from Defendant’s reservoir escaped onto Plaintiff’s land because of an unknown latent defect in Defendant’s subsoil. Plaintiff sued Defendant for trespass. Synopsis of Rule of Law. One who lawfully brings something onto his land, which though harmless while it remains there will naturally do mischief if it escapes the land, will be strictly liable for its escape. ...
Rylands v. Fletcher
Citation24 Nev. 251, 52 P. 274,1898 Nev. Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued in connection with the flooding of his mine. The trial court found in his favor. Defendant sought review. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and, if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape. ...
Fletcher v. Rylands
Citation. L.R. 1 Exch. 265 (1866) Brief Fact Summary. Defendant built a reservoir on top of plaintiff’s old mine. After the reservoir was completed, the mine shaft collapsed and flooded plaintiff’s mine. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person who lawfully brings something onto his land that if it escapes is capable of doing harm, is strictly liable for any harm occurring as a natural consequence of the escape. ...
Fletcher v. Rylands
Citation. L.R. 1 Ex. 265 (Exchequer Chamber, 1866) Brief Fact Summary. Rylands owned a reservoir that sat on top of abandoned mining shafts that were filled with subsoil. Water from the reservoir burst into the shafts and travelled to mines used by Fletcher, flooding them. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person who for his own purposes brings anything onto his land that is likely to do damage if it escapes is prima facie liable for all damages that are a natural consequence of its escape. ...
Fletcher v. Rylands
Citation159 ER 737, Volume 159 Brief Fact Summary. Water from Defendant’s reservoir escaped onto Plaintiff’s land because of an unknown latent defect in Defendant’s subsoil. Plaintiff sued Defendant for trespass. Synopsis of Rule of Law. This action is maintainable on the plain ground that Defendant has caused water to flow into Plaintiff’s land. ...
Fletcher v. Rylands
View this case and other resources at: ...
Miller v. Civil Constructors, Inc.
CitationMiller v. Civil Constructors, 651 N.E.2d 239, 272 Ill. App. 3d 263, 1995 Ill. App. LEXIS 323, 209 Ill. Dec. 311 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. May 5, 1995) Brief Fact Summary. Person struck by stray bullet at a quarry, where police target practice was conducted, sues in strict liability claiming the use of firearms should be considered “ultrahazardous†activity. Synopsis of Rule of Law. If an activity is deemed “ultrahazardousâ€, strict liability is imposed and there is no need to prove negligence. Courts must analyze the follo ...
Golden v. Amory
CitationGolden v. Amory, 329 Mass. 484, 109 N.E.2d 131, 1952 Mass. LEXIS 603 (Mass. 1952). Brief Fact Summary. The Plaintiffs, Golden and others (Plaintiffs), claim that Defendant, Amory’s (Defendants), negligence in maintaining a dike caused them real estate damage after a hurricane resulted in a flood. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Plaintiffs are not responsible under strict liability theories when the damage caused was an unanticipated act of God. ...
Bolton v. Stone
Citation108 Fed. Appx. 548, 2004 U.S. App Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff was struck in the head by a cricket ball from Defendant’s cricket club. Plaintiff sued Defendant for public nuisance and negligence. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The test to be applied here is whether the risk of damage to a person on the road was so small that a reasonable man in the position of the Defendant, considering the matter from the point of view of safety, would have thought it right to refrain from taking steps to prevent danger. ...
Brown v. Collins
CitationBrown v. Collins, 541 U.S. 948, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 2215, 124 S. Ct. 1684, 158 L. Ed. 2d 377, 72 U.S.L.W. 3598 (U.S. Mar. 22, 2004) Brief Fact Summary. Collins (Defendant) unintentionally and without fault entered and damaged Brown (Plaintiff) land when his horses became frightened. Plaintiff sued Defendant for trespass. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The distinction made between natural and unnatural use of land is not established in the law. The rule in Rylands v. Fletcher would impose penalty upon efforts made in a reasonable, skillful, and careful manner. ...