## Facts

- Leon and Helen Wheat owned a 37.5-acre farm near Benton, Illinois, and lived there during the period at issue (1963–1966).
- Freeman Coal Mining Corp. operated the Orient No. 5 coal mine on nearby land and began operations around 1962.
- Freeman constructed a pond used in washing and separating coal, located close to the Wheats’ property, and built a retaining wall by piling mining refuse along the pond’s side.
- The Wheats alleged that Freeman’s operations caused coal dust and smoke to drift onto their land, preventing them from opening windows and interfering with their ability to work and live at home.
- They alleged the dust infiltrated their home, affected their food, clothing, and furniture, damaged and blackened the exterior of the house, and interfered with their water supply.
- They also alleged pond water backed onto their property, contained harmful chemicals, and damaged their soil.
- They further alleged that burning refuse in the retaining wall emitted noxious gases that interfered with their use and enjoyment of their home.
- A jury awarded the Wheats $12,000 in damages.

## Issues

1. Whether the complaint stated claims for nuisance and negligence despite not expressly alleging “unreasonable” and “intentional” interference.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to submit to the jury the question of unreasonable interference with the Wheats’ use and enjoyment of their land.
3. Whether alleged trial errors (evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and permitting an amendment concerning damages) required reversal.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the $12,000 judgment for the Wheats.
- The court held the complaint was legally sufficient because it alleged specific facts (physical invasion, property damage, and substantial interference) from which required nuisance elements could be inferred.
- The court held the evidence of smoke, coal dust, contaminated water, and noxious gases was sufficient to permit a jury finding of unreasonable interference.
- The court found no reversible error in the challenged evidentiary rulings or the jury instructions when considered as a whole.
- The court held allowing an amendment concerning the damages theory at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence was permissible and not shown to have unfairly prejudiced Freeman.

## Legal Principles

- A private nuisance claim may be supported by allegations and proof of substantial, unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of land, including interference caused by emissions (smoke, dust, odors, gases) and contaminated water.
- Under Illinois pleading practice, a complaint need not recite specific legal terms if it alleges concrete facts that, if proven, satisfy the elements of the cause of action.
- Whether an interference is “unreasonable” is generally a fact question for the jury where the record supports substantial, ongoing invasion and resulting discomfort or property damage.
- Trial court management of evidence, instructions, and amendments will not justify reversal absent a showing of prejudicial error.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a nuisance/negligence verdict for neighboring landowners harmed by coal-mine emissions and contaminated water, holding that detailed factual allegations can suffice without expressly pleading “unreasonable” or “intentional,” and that the reasonableness of the interference was properly left to the jury.


Wheat v. Freeman Coal Mining Corp., 319 N.E.2d 290 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974)