New Hampshire Neighbor Disputes Over Water, Drainage & Easements: A Defense Trial Win and What It Means for Homeowners

Apis Law represented the defendants/homeowners and won after a three-day bench trial in New Hampshire Superior Court. The Court entered judgment for the defense on nuisance, negligence, and fraudulent misrepresentation, resulting in no monetary recovery against the homeowners.  

New Hampshire water easement disputes? Protect your property and your rights—book a confidential consultation with Apis Law:

Schedule Consultation

Why We Prevailed

Causation governed the outcome. New Hampshire law required the plaintiffs to prove that the neighbors’ conduct was a substantial factor in the alleged harm. The Court held they failed to meet that burden: while aging couplings on a private one-inch water line could have leaked, credible evidence showed the saturation was explained by other sources—historic hillside springs, groundwater, and potential upstream main-line issues. Without proof that defendants’ conduct substantially caused the harm, the nuisance and negligence claims failed.  

Easement maintenance ≠ automatic liability. The Court recognized that the water easement beneficiary generally bears the duty to maintain an easement in New Hampshire, but it emphasized that a maintenance duty alone does not establish liability—proximate cause still must be proven. 

Misrepresentation without damages doesn’t pay. The Court rejected fraud, finding the neighbor honestly (though mistakenly) believed he held water-drawing rights. Even considering negligent misrepresentation, the plaintiffs failed to prove pecuniary loss, so no damages were awarded.  

The New Hampshire Context

The properties sit on a historically wet hillside with natural springs and remnants of an old municipal water line—an environment the Court found critical to assessing causation. A map in the record depicts the terrain, the abandoned main line, and valve locations considered during the trial. 

Practical Takeaways for NH Homeowners

• Causation is king. In drainage and seepage easement disputes in New Hampshire, success turns on isolating sources (water valve positions, controlled flow tests, trench exposures) and ruling out natural alternatives. Photos of puddles are not enough. 

• Document your easement upkeep. Keep dated notes and receipts for inspections/repairs to show diligence—then insist the other side prove your actions (not Mother Nature) caused their issue. 

• Verify property-rights statements. Even sincere mistakes about water rights won’t support fraud, and negligent misrepresentation still requires proof of actual financial loss.  

Considering a water, drainage, or easement dispute in New Hampshire?

Apis Law defends New Hampshire homeowners statewide in neighbor disputes involving water, drainage, and easements—and we try cases when necessary. If you’re facing a claim (or want to prevent one), we can evaluate causation, design a testing plan, and assemble the expert record that wins in New Hampshire courts.

FAQs: New Hampshire Neighbor Disputes Over Water, Drainage & Easements

Q1: What was the outcome of the recent New Hampshire case?

Apis Law represented the homeowners (defendants) at a three-day bench trial; the Court found no nuisance, no negligence, and no fraud. The Court recognized a claim for negligent misrepresentation but awarded no damages, so there was no monetary recovery against the homeowners. 

Q2: What must a plaintiff prove to win a nuisance or negligence case in NH?

They must show an unreasonable, substantial interference (nuisance) and, for negligence, duty, breach, and proximate cause—including that the defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in the harm. 

Q3: If a private water line is old or leaking, does that automatically create liability?

No. Even where couplings likely leaked, the Court held the plaintiffs failed to prove those leaks were a substantial cause of the wet conditions, given other plausible sources (historic hillside springs, groundwater, upstream main-line issues). 

Q4: What kind of evidence actually moves the needle on causation?

Courts look for isolation testing, valve positions, trench exposures, and expert flow analysis that rule out natural or alternative sources—not just photos of puddles. The Court specifically faulted the failure to check valve configurations and to expose upstream sections. 

Q5: Who is responsible for maintaining an easemented water line in NH?

Generally, the dominant estate (benefiting property) has the right and duty to maintain the easement. But a maintenance duty alone does not prove causation or liability.   

Q6: Our neighborhood has old municipal infrastructure and natural springs. Does that matter?

Yes. The Court emphasized the setting—historic springs, an abandoned main line, and a wet hillside—as critical context in assessing causation. 

Q7: My neighbor claims “water rights” based on an easement. Can I rely on what they say?

Treat statements cautiously. The Court rejected fraud where a neighbor honestly (but mistakenly) believed he had water-drawing rights. But even for negligent misrepresentation, you still need to prove pecuniary loss to recover—no proven loss, no damages.   

Q8: Can I shut a valve that affects a neighbor’s line?

Don’t touch shared infrastructure without legal clarity. In this case, valve positions and potential back-feeding were central to causation disputes. Get counsel to review the easement deed and verify valve/control rights before acting. 

Q9: Are French drains, culverts, or grading changes risky?

Any change can be litigated, but well-planned drainage supported by documentation and expert input is defensible. Preserve photos, plans, and receipts to show you’re directing water away from problem areas, not toward a neighbor. (General risk-management guidance; always fact-specific.)

Q10: Do I need an expert?

Often yes. Hydrology and flow causation are technical. Courts expect methodical testing and expert analysis when multiple natural/man-made sources exist. 

Q11: What will Apis Law do first if I’m accused of causing water damage?

We map the site, audit easements and valve controls, plan targeted isolation/flow tests, and build a record that separates natural conditions from alleged conduct—exactly the approach that helped deliver the defense win described above.   

Q12: When should I call a lawyer?

Immediately, if you receive a demand letter or if neighbors are talking about valves, lines, or “diversion.” Early testing and documentation often decide these cases.

Schedule Consultation