Majesky v. Lawrence, 2015 Ohio 49

In 1992 the Lawrences bought a house; in 1999 and 2005 they added concrete pads/expanded their driveway on the side adjacent to Majesky’s later-purchased property.
After moving in, Majesky experienced water infiltration into his basement from the side of the Lawrences’ property and installed physical barriers; he says the barriers stopped basement flooding but not saturation of his land.
Majesky sued in 2010 alleging negligence (improper driveway construction), continuing trespass (surface water runoff), nuisance, and punitive damages.
The Lawrences moved for summary judgment arguing (1) the claims were time-barred by the statute of limitations and (2) there was no evidence their driveway increased runoff onto Majesky’s property.
The trial court granted summary judgment for the Lawrences; the court of appeals reviewed de novo and considered whether the trespass/nuisance were continuing and whether genuine issues of material fact existed about unreasonable diversion of surface water.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether claims are time-barred	Majesky: runoff is a continuing trespass/nuisance that tolls limitations	Lawrences: last driveway alteration was 2005; four-year statute bars 2010 suit	Court: negligence claims for 1999/2005 acts are time-barred; continuing trespass, nuisance, and punitive damages are not tolled and survive because the alleged conduct is ongoing
Whether genuine issues of material fact exist on liability for runoff (trespass/nuisance)	Majesky: affidavit, photos, interrogatory answers, and statement by Lawrence that he directed slope toward Majesky show ongoing, intentional diversion causing saturation	Lawrences: consultant report says driveway slopes to street and would not increase runoff onto Majesky; photos show runoff into Lawrences’ grass	Court: Majesky met reciprocal burden showing evidence of runoff entering the shared grass area, no physical barrier, and possible intentional redirection; genuine issue of material fact exists, so summary judgment improper

Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (procedural standard for summary judgment)
Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (moving party burden on summary judgment)
State ex rel. Doner v. Zody, 130 Ohio St.3d 446 (continuing trespass tolls statute of limitations)
Valley Ry. Co. v. Franz, 43 Ohio St. 623 (distinction between single completed trespass and continuing trespass)
Sexton v. Mason, 117 Ohio St.3d 275 (ongoing conduct/retention of control distinguishes continuing trespass)
McGlashan v. Spade Rockledge Terrace Condo Dev. Corp., 62 Ohio St.2d 55 (reasonable-use rule for surface water disputes)
State v. Swartz, 88 Ohio St.3d 131 (nuisance that remains under actor's control is continuing)
State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Tompkins, 75 Ohio St.3d 447 (non-moving party's reciprocal burden in summary judgment)