The right to lateral support is a common law right. In the case of adjoining properties, either landowner has a legally enforceable right to lateral support from the adjoining landowner. An action for damages to property when lateral support is impaired should allege the following:
- the relative situation of the properties;
- the interest of the plaintiff;
- the duty of the defendant;
- the acts done;
- the results; and
- that the work was done injuriously, wrongfully, carelessly, and negligently.
Walker v. Strosnider is a case where a land owner hired an architect and contractor to construct an excavation on his property and during construction, a building on adjacent property collapsed[i]. The second floor of the building was occupied by business tenants who ran a printing business there. The business tenants brought an action against the owner excavator to recover for damage to their business and equipment. The pleading alleged factors like the relation of the adjoining owners, the interest of the plaintiffs as tenants of the second floor of the building, the acts done by the defendant or by agents, employees and servants, injuriously, wrongfully, carelessly and negligently digging out and carrying away the soil immediately adjoining the west wall of the building and making a deep excavation on his lot along the whole length of the building, and allowed a great volume of water to stand in it for about six days by means of which the building was made to fall to the ground, damaging and destroying the property of the plaintiffs contained therein. The Supreme Court of Appeals, West Virginia rejected the plea that the allegations were insufficient and held that sufficiency of the pleadings was apparent.
Moreover, in the case of properties where removal of lateral support has occurred to land in its natural state, there is absolute or strict liability and it is not necessary to allege negligence. It has been held that “the right of support to land from the adjoining soil is a right of property, and not an easement, and if that support is withdrawn and injury ensues, he can maintain an action for damages without proving negligence or want of skill on the part of the adjoining owner.”[ii]
[i] 67 W. Va. 39, 64 (W. Va. 1910)
[ii] Levi v. Schwartz, 201 Md. 575, 582 (Md. 1953)
