Brian Kowalski appeals, and Traditions of America at Liberty Hills (Beaver) Condominium Association ("Condo Association") cross-appeals, from the judgment entered on January 2, 2018.1 We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.
Mr. Kowalski owns property situated downhill from the property on which the Liberty Hills Condominiums were constructed. The trial court set forth the relevant facts as follows:
[Mr.] Kowalski acquired the property, that he claims is being flooded, when he purchased it at a Sheriff's sale on or about March 12, 2012. The previous owner, David Hoffman, purchased the property, virtually undeveloped, in 1977. At first, Mr. Hoffman lived in the dilapidated farmhouse, which he later remodeled. While he lived there, Mr. Hoffman installed a piping system to collect storm water through the valley on his property uphill to the Kenny Farm, which is the area where the Liberty Hills Condominiums are now located. From 1982 to 1983, over the course of a year and a half, Mr. Hoffman buried a natural stream on the property, using 12-inch to 24-inch underground pipes. These pipes were used to carry water runoff from the uphill properties, in the area of Kenny Farm, across his property, to the Crow's Run Creek. Mr. Hoffman started the drainage system up at the ravine with a 12-inch pipe, and as it progressed down through the valley, he increased to an 18-inch pipe and ended up with a 24-inch pipe down at Crow's Run Creek. He installed catch basins along the way. He also removed all of the trees, and then cleared the property to make a pond and build a new residence. Over the course of the next several years, he constructed the pond, gazebo and residence on the property, and he lived there until he started to experience financial difficulties around 2005 or 2006. He vacated the property following a mortgage foreclosure action in 2009.
In 2007, while Mr. Hoffman was still living there, New Sewickley Township and Economy Borough approved TOA's plan to develop the Liberty Hills Condominium site on the Kenny Farm located uphill from the Hoffman property. As part of the development, TOA constructed a detention pond at the Liberty Hill Condominiums site to detain the water flow from Liberty Hills that drained onto the Hoffman property to Crow's Run Creek. Mr. Hoffman raised concerns about the development to both TOA and [New Sewickley] Township. The development is located partially in New Sewickley Township and partially in Economy Borough. Both municipalities approved the TOA storm water management plan prior to construction.
Since the Liberty Hills Condominiums were built, the parties have disagreed about the nature and extent of the water runoff from the development, and how, or whether it has adversely affected the Hoffman/Kowalski property. Prior to buying the property, Mr. Kowalski lived only a few miles away; he drove by it a couple of times per week, since 2006 or 2007. Mr. Kowalski was aware of flooding issues on the property before he purchased it. From 2009 to 2012, the property remained vacant. Mr. Kowalski bought the property at the Sheriff's sale in March 2012 and moved in shortly thereafter. Although the home needed some work because it sat vacant for a few years, the home was habitable.
Mr. Kowalski filed this lawsuit [against TOA and the Condo Association (collectively "the defendants") ] in July 2013, claiming that water runoff from Liberty Hills Condominiums overwhelms the storm water pipe and causes flooding on his property. [He asserted claims sounding in breach of contract, negligence, trespass, nuisance, and a violation of the Storm Water Management Act. The Condo Association filed a cross-claim for indemnity against TOA.] TOA and the [Condo] Association claim that any flooding on the Kowalski property is caused by Mr. Hoffman's burying of the natural stream, using a pipe that was too small to handle the natural storm water runoff. They also allege that the remedy Mr. Kowalski seeks to fix the flooding on his property was necessary before any construction at Liberty Hills, and as such, he has suffered no harm caused by their actions.
[The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted partial summary judgment in favor of TOA and the Condo Association on the breach of contract and negligence claims, reasoning that those claims were barred by the relevant statute of limitations. The case proceeded on the remaining claims for trespass, nuisance, and a violation of the Storm Water Management Act.]
At [a non-jury] trial, Mr. Kowalski offered testimony from a professional engineer, Scott Shoup, who has served as the engineer for several municipalities, including Economy Borough. As part of his duties as the Economy Borough engineer, Mr. Shoup approved the storm water plan for the Liberty Hills Condominium Development. He testified that, in his professional opinion, the water runoff after construction was greater than anticipated in the original plan submitted to [Economy] Borough. In his opinion, to remedy the excess water will require the installation of 36[-]inch and 42[-]inch pipes from the top of the hill, across the Kowalski property, to the Crow's Run Creek. He believed the storm water plan for the property should be designed to handle a 100-year storm, as recommended by the DEP. Significantly, on cross examination, Mr. Shoup acknowledged that the same remedy was needed to manage storm water runoff on the Kowalski property before any construction at Liberty Hills.
Mr. Kowalski [sought] damages in excess of $ 300,000, the cost to install the storm water management system recommended by Mr. Shoup. Following presentation of Mr. Kowalski's case in chief, both Defendants made oral motions for a non[ ]suit on Mr. Kowalski's claims for trespass, nuisance, and a violation of the Storm Water Management Act. The [trial c]ourt granted the motions. The [trial c]ourt entered a written order confirming the entry of a non[ ]suit on the docket, on November 16, 2017....
....
Mr. Kowalski filed [timely] post-trial motions and requested the [trial c]ourt to reverse its decision on summary judgment concerning the breach of contract and negligence claims. Mr. Kowalski also requested the [trial c]ourt to set aside the non[ ]suit on the nuisance, trespass, and Storm Water Management Act claims.
Trial Court Opinion, 12/12/11, at 2-5 (citations to record and footnotes omitted).
On December 12, 2017, the trial court entered an opinion and order granting in part and denying in part Mr. Kowalski's post-trial motions. The trial court affirmed (1) the entry of summary judgment on the breach of contract and negligence claims; and (2) the entry of nonsuit on the nuisance and Storm Water Management Act counts. However, it determined that the entry of nonsuit on the trespass claim was in error, reversed that ruling, and entered judgment in favor of Mr. Kowalski on his trespass claim against the Condo Association. The trial court awarded Mr. Kowalski nominal damages of only $ 1.00. He thereafter filed a timely notice of appeal, and the Condo Association filed a timely notice of cross-appeal.2
At appeal No. 80 WDA 2018, Mr. Kowalski raises the following issues for our review:
1. Whether [Mr. Kowalski's] negligence and breach of contract claims are barred by the statute of limitations.
2. Did the trial court err in failing to enter judgment in favor of [Mr. Kowalski] on the breach of contract claim[?]
3. Did the trial court err in granting a non[ ]suit to [TOA and the Condo Association] on [Mr. Kowalski's] trespass and nuisance claims[?]
4. Did the trial court err in finding that there was not a causal nexus between the trespass and the loss/damage to [Mr. Kowalski?]
5. Did the trial court err in entering judgment in favor of [Mr. Kowalski] and against ... [the Condo Association] for only nominal damages[?]
Kowalski's brief at 6 (unnecessary capitalization omitted).3
At appeal No. 125 WDA 2018, the Condo Association raises the following issues for our review:
1. Did the trial court err as a matter of law in granting Mr. Kowalski's motion for post-trial relief with respect to his trespass claim against [the Condo Association] because it misapplied the law of Pennsylvania regarding discharge of water from an uphill landowner's property, because the evidence did not support a finding that the [Condo] Association was responsible for causing the complained of discharge of storm water from its property on to Mr. Kowalski's property, and because there was no evidence that the [Condo] Association owned the storm water management system at Liberty Hills[?]
2. Did the trial court err as a matter of law in granting Mr. Kowalski's motion for post-trial relief with respect to his trespass claim against the [Condo] Association because [Mr.] Kowalski did not have standing to assert that claim?
3. Did the trial court err as a matter of law in granting Mr. Kowalski's motion for post-trial relief with respect to his trespass claim against the [Condo] Association because that claim was barred by the statute of limitations?
4. Did the trial court err as a matter of law in not conducting a trial on the [Condo] Association's cross-claim for indemnity against TOA ... [where the] evidence showed that TOA designed and built the Liberty Hills storm water drainage system, and there was no evidence that discharge of water on to the
...
