A landowner has the right to use insecticides on his/her property; however, s/he may not use it in a negligent manner.  Any injury resulting from such use will result in absolute liability.  Even if the injury was caused by an independent contractor, the owner cannot escape from the liability for causing injuries to an adjoining landowner by spreading insecticides in a negligent manner.  However, if an independent contractor had the authority to take the main decisions with regard to the spreading of herbicides, and if it caused any injury to the neighbor, then the landowner will not be held liable.

In Hammond Ranch Corp. v. Dodson[i], an airplane passed over pasture of the plaintiff scattering cotton with poison over the plaintiff’s pasture.  The plaintiff saw something white all over the ground resulting in the injury and death to certain stock.  Defendant contended that he is not liable because the spraying was done by an independent contractor pointing out that the employer is not liable for the negligence caused by the contractor.  However, the court held that because of the dangerous character of the act, the work was not delegable, and the defendant was in real performance and not the agent or servant.

In Young v. Darter[ii], the court observed that landowner used weed killer on his land and was liable for damage caused to neighbor’s cotton, as long as the landowner fails to prove that the damage was due to neighbor’s default or vis major or act of God.

In Pitchfork Land & Cattle Co. v. King[iii], a landowner who employed an independent contractor to spray his/her land with herbicide was not held liable for injuries to a crop on adjacent land that was caused by the drift of the chemical thereon.

[i] 199 Ark. 846 (Ark. 1940)

[ii] 1961 OK 142 (Okla. 1961)

[iii] 162 Tex. 331 (Tex. 1961)