10.26 General Rights and Liabilities

• Library: Real Estate Practice Deskbook (2019 Ed.)

2. (§10.26) General Rights and Liabilities

Before 1993, Missouri followed the modified common enemy rule. See Restatement of Torts §§ 822–64 (1939); Roberts v. Hocker, 610 S.W.2d 321 (Mo. App. W.D. 1980).

In Heins Implement Co. v. Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission, 859 S.W.2d 681 (Mo. banc 1993), the Supreme Court of Missouri expressly disavowed the modified common enemy rule and expressly adopted the comparative reasonable use rule. Thus, from 1993, a landowner may make a reasonable use of the landowner's land and may make reasonable modifications to the natural drainage pattern as long as the landowner does not cause unreasonable harm to the neighbors. The issue to be decided is whether the gravity of the harm outweighs the utility of the drainage alteration.

Subsequent cases have followed Heins, 859 S.W.2d 681. See, e.g.:

· Klokkenga v. Carolan, 200 S.W.3d 144 (Mo. App. W.D. 2006)

· Mo. Highway & Transp. Comm'n v. Rockhill Dev. Corp., 865 S.W.2d 765 (Mo. App. W.D. 1993)

· Campbell v. Anderson, 866 S.W.2d 139 (Mo. App. W.D. 1993)

· Kueffer v. Brown, 879 S.W.2d 658 (Mo. App. E.D. 1994)

· Colbert v. Nichols, 935 S.W.2d 730 (Mo. App. S.D. 1996)

· Farley v. Wappapello Foods, Inc., 959 S.W.2d 888 (Mo. App. S.D. 1997)

But cf. Rosenfeld v. Thoele, 28 S.W.3d 446 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000) (using modified common enemy analysis).

Overflow flood waters are also...