Edwards v. Sims, Judge

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
232 Ky. 791, 24 S.W.2d 619 (1929)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A court of equity has the inherent power to compel a landowner to permit an inspection and survey of their property, including a cave, when an adjacent landowner shows a bona fide claim and a reasonable necessity to determine if their land is being trespassed upon from beneath the surface.

Facts:

Edwards owns land containing the only known entrance to the Great Onyx Cave.
Edwards operates the Great Onyx Cave as a commercial enterprise, charging admission for tours.
Lee owns land adjacent to Edwards's property.
Lee claims that a portion of the Great Onyx Cave extends under his property.
Lee believes Edwards is trespassing by conducting commercial tours through the part of the cave that is under Lee's land.
The physical truth of whether the cave extends under Lee's land can only be determined by a survey conducted inside the cave.

Procedural Posture:

Lee sued Edwards in the Edmonson circuit court, the court of first instance.
The circuit court ordered surveyors to enter Edwards's property to survey the Great Onyx Cave.
Edwards appealed the survey order to the state's highest court.
The highest court dismissed the appeal, holding that the survey order was an interlocutory (non-final) order from which no immediate appeal could be taken.
Edwards then initiated this original proceeding in the state's highest court, seeking a writ of prohibition to prevent the circuit court judge from enforcing the survey order.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a court of equity have the inherent authority to order a survey of a cave on one person's property to determine if it extends beneath and constitutes a trespass upon another person's adjacent property?

Opinions:

Majority - Commissioner Stanley

Yes. A court of equity has the inherent power to order an inspection to ascertain facts essential to the determination of a legal dispute. The court reasoned by analogy to mining cases, where courts have long exercised the power to order inspections of mines to determine if a trespass is occurring. It held there is no difference in principle between inspecting a mine for extracted minerals and inspecting a cave for trespass. Citing the U.S. Supreme Court case Montana Co. v. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co., the court stated that the 'lesser evil of a temporary invasion of one’s possession should yield to the higher good of establishing justice.' Such an order is not an unconstitutional taking of property, but rather a temporary and limited interruption of exclusive use, necessary for the administration of justice.

Dissenting - Judge Logan

No. The court should not order a survey that will cause irreparable injury to one party without benefiting the other. The dissent argues that the traditional maxim 'cujus est solum...' is an outdated sophistry that should not apply to modern situations. Ownership should be based on dominion and use; since Lee cannot access or use the portion of the cave beneath his land, he has nothing of value to protect. The dissent proposes a new rule: a cave should belong absolutely to the person who owns its entrance and who, through exploration and development, has subjected it to their dominion. Edwards, through his labor and investment, created the cave's value, and equity should not allow others to despoil the fruits of his conquest.

Analysis:

This case affirms a court of equity's broad power to order discovery, even when it involves a physical intrusion onto another's property. It extends the legal principles governing subterranean mineral rights to the novel context of commercial caves, reinforcing the traditional ad coelum doctrine of land ownership. The decision prioritizes the court's function of truth-finding over a landowner's absolute right to exclude. The dissent, however, is significant for proposing a radical, use-based theory of property ownership that challenges traditional doctrines and foreshadows later legal conflicts over airspace and other intangible property rights.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Edwards v. Sims, Judge (1929)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"