Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Civil) 30.18

The dama

ge to real property, determined by the difference between the fair market value

of the real property immediately before the occurrence and its fair market value immediately

after the occurrence.

Notes o

n Use

This el

ement is to be inserted between the two paragraphs of IPI 30.01 when the evidence

justifies its use.

This ins

truction is appropriate in a nuisance case, where the nuisance cannot be abated.

For repairable damage, see IPI 30.17.

Commen

t

For perm

anent damage to land or buildings, the usual measure of damages is the decrease

in the value of the property. Illinois Cent. Ry. Co. v. Ferrell, 108 Ill.App. 659 (4th Dist.1902);

Clark v. Public Service Co. of N. Ill., 278 Ill.App. 426 (2d Dist.1934); Stirs, Inc. v. City of

Chicago, 24 Ill.App.3d 118, 320 N.E.2d 216 (1st Dist.1974). An exception to this general rule is

damage to property as a result of mine subsidence, where the cost of repair or restoration is the

proper measure. Donk Bros. Coal & Coke Co. v. Novero, 135 Ill.App. 633 (4th Dist.1907).

Blasting is another exception requiring repair. Fitzsimons & Connell Co. v. Braun, 199 Ill. 390,

65 N.E. 249 (1902); Peet v. Dolese & Shepard Co., 41 Ill.App.2d 358, 190 N.E.2d 613 (2d

Dist.1963).

In chara

cterizing an injury to realty as permanent or temporary, a court must necessarily

look to the nature of the thing injured, and the exact interest harmed. Arras v. Columbia Quarry

Co., 52 Ill.App.3d 560, 367 N.E.2d 580, 10 Ill.Dec. 192 (5th Dist.1977); Myers v. Arnold, 83

Ill.App.3d 1, 403 N.E.2d 316, 38 Ill.Dec. 228 (4th Dist.1980). See comment to IPI 30.17.

The mea

sure of damages for the destruction of trees and land is the difference in value of

the land immediately before and immediately after the damage. This rule has been applied to

ornamental or shade tre es (First Nat'l Bank v. Amco Engineering Co., 32 Ill.App.3d 451, 335

N.E.2d 591 (2d Dist.1975); Rogers v. Enzinger, 339 Ill.App. 376, 89 N.E.2d 853 (2d Dist.1950)),

and to orchard or fruit trees. Collins v. Illinois Cent. R.R., 161 Ill.App. 95 (4th Dist.1911).

Damage for the destruction of forest trees is the value of the trees, rather than the difference in

value of the land before and after the destruction. Citizens Nat'l Bank v. Joseph Kesl & Sons Co.,

378 Ill. 428, 38 N.E.2d 734 (1941); Jones v. Sanitary Dist. of Chicago, 252 Ill. 591, 97 N.E. 210

(1911).

_____________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________