温瑟诉美国钢铁公司案

Matthew and Tracey Winther, owners of three undeveloped lots in Hoover, Alabama, sued United States Steel Corporation over stormwater runoff from U.S. Steel's adjacent 325-acre development, The Preserve. The Winthers alleged that U.S. Steel's grading, deforestation, and drainage planning altered natural drainage, causing increased stormwater flows, erosion, and other damage to their six-acre property drained by Hurricane Branch. They raised four causes of action: Common Law Water Claim, Trespass, Nuisance, and Negligence/Wantonness. U.S. Steel removed the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. On November 3, 2023, the district court addressed Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on trespass and nuisance liability and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.

The court denied Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and granted Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in part and denied it in part. The case continued to trial on remaining claims. Following trial, U.S. Steel filed a Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, which was denied on February 25, 2025. On March 26, 2025, the Winthers filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

The central dispute was whether U.S. Steel was liable for trespass and nuisance due to stormwater runoff from The Preserve affecting the Winther Property. A key legal question was whether Alabama's "common enemy doctrine"—which generally allows landowners to divert surface water without liability—barred the Winthers' claims. The court also examined whether the Winthers had sufficiently pleaded a "channelization claim," an exception to the common enemy doctrine applicable when an upper landowner channels water onto a lower property.

The case highlights the tension between residential property owners and large-scale developers over stormwater management in rapidly developing areas. It underscores the complexities of applying Alabama's common enemy doctrine in modern contexts where upstream development substantially alters natural drainage patterns. The litigation also demonstrates the procedural challenges plaintiffs face in pleading exceptions to established doctrines, as well as the extended timeline—spanning from 2017 through 2025—that such property disputes can entail.