Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />l0 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />• <br />512 <br />the Court's view that the evidence indicates that the amount of <br />water that came in that way was fairly negligible and that the <br />(majority of the water which came in came in through this cut. <br />BAs a result of this, the dike which separated the plaintiff's <br />property from the defendant's. gravel pit was overtopped, and wa <br />was discharged onto the property of the plaintiffs, destroying <br />'.the fishlife in the property and destroying certain fences, <br />uprooting certain trees, and so forth. <br />Now, as a result of this, the plaintiff, John <br />~Slovek, Sr., suffered very, very great emotional distress. <br />However, the fact that such emotional distress would be suffered <br />by anyone as a result of the building of this canal was not <br />(reasonably foreseeable by the county when it did that, and in my <br />opinion, has not rendered them liable to damages on account of <br />that emotional distress. I will say that I found, since it comes <br />down to that, that I found Dr. Anneberg's description of the <br />origins of the distress and the anger, I suppose perhaps a ~' <br />better word, of the plaintiff, more convincing than I did Dr. <br />Hilton, primarily for the reason that many of Dr. Anneberg's <br />observations coincided with observations that the Court was able <br />to make of the plaintiff's behavior here in the courtroom and <br />on the witness stand. <br />Now, I didn't find that, as I say. I found that the <br />county was negligent in putting that cut in the dike, but I <br />didn't find any evidence of outrageous conduct in this matter. <br />