branches overhanging property boundaries

[foodforests]

What is the law regarding branches of trees overhanging property lines? Is this a state by state thing, or is there some federal legislation covering the area?
For instance, if I have trees growing on my side of a property line, and the neighbour has a problem with branches hanging over his side, who is legally responsible for trimming those branches? Also, if a branch falls and hurts someone or property, who is liable?

 

[treeseer]

What is the law regarding branches of trees overhanging property lines? Is this a state by state thing

Yes check state statute and case law.

Supreme Court has ruled we own the earth above and the ground beneath, but other law states we cannot take the property of our neighbors (by killing or damaging shared trees, for instance).

YOu could ask ASCA members in your state, too.

 

[whitenack]

Since you are from Hawaii, it is best that you check with your local laws and customs.

You folks on the islands typically have much different laws than us haoles.

That said, in KY, anything that crosses the boundary line is owned by that particular property owner, and he may do whatever s/he may wish with what part of the tree.

If a tree or limb falls and causes damages, it depends on the status of the tree at the time of the failure. If the tree was healthy, and an act of God caused the failure, there is no liability on the tree owner's part. If the tree was dead and should have been cut down, the owner is liable for any damage it does.

However, the best practice is to treat your neighbor as you would want to be treated.

 

[treeseer]

in KY, anything that crosses the boundary line is owned by that particular property owner, and he may do whatever s/he may wish with what part of the tree.

So if my tree is 1" from the border, then grows so part of the trunk is in your property, you have the right to slice it off, even if that means my tree will die?

And before that, you in KY have the right to remove every root and every branch that is in your property, even if that means killing my landmark tree?

I don't think that every judge in KY will grant you these rights.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

So if my tree is 1" from the border, then grows so part of the trunk is in your property, you have the right to slice it off, even if that means my tree will die?

And before that, you in KY have the right to remove every root and every branch that is in your property, even if that means killing my landmark tree?

I don't think that every judge in KY will grant you these rights.

And what if he sliced off the roots and the tree fell on your house?
Using the property line is only a general guideline. You shouldn't damage your neighbors property (plants included), or create liabilities in the process.
Tree pruning can be tricky because aesthetics come into play. You might trim a property line tree in a way you think is beautiful, and your neighbor may think you destroyed the tree.
Definitely don't proceed without coming to agreement with your neighbor about what you want to do to the shared trees.

 

[turnkey4099]

So if my tree is 1" from the border, then grows so part of the trunk is in your property, you have the right to slice it off, even if that means my tree will die?

And before that, you in KY have the right to remove every root and every branch that is in your property, even if that means killing my landmark tree?

I don't think that every judge in KY will grant you these rights.

Well, your example takes the laws to the extreme, but yes, that is the law in most states. Would it be allowed if taken to court first? I doubt it.

Harry K

 

[whitenack]

So if my tree is 1" from the border, then grows so part of the trunk is in your property, you have the right to slice it off, even if that means my tree will die?

And before that, you in KY have the right to remove every root and every branch that is in your property, even if that means killing my landmark tree?

I don't think that every judge in KY will grant you these rights.

Well, I don't think that the law has been acted out to that degree, so it is impossible to say what the KY court system would say in a case like what you discribe.

Most Kentuckians value nature, so I don't think we see too many "1 inch of your trunk is on my property so I'm going to shave that part off" mentality. You will see "Your walnut tree branches are sagging to the ground due to the weight of walnuts. I am going to trim the branches that sag onto my property", but not the selfishness that you describe.

If a property owner does not have a right to all 4 corners of his propery, what is the point of having a deed, or property lines?

Definitely don't proceed without coming to agreement with your neighbor about what you want to do to the shared trees.

This is definately the best rule of thumb.

 

[046]

this sounds correct, as always check your local regs...

That said, in KY, anything that crosses the boundary line is owned by that particular property owner, and he may do whatever s/he may wish with what part of the tree.

If a tree or limb falls and causes damages, it depends on the status of the tree at the time of the failure. If the tree was healthy, and an act of God caused the failure, there is no liability on the tree owner's part. If the tree was dead and should have been cut down, the owner is liable for any damage it does.

However, the best practice is to treat your neighbor as you would want to be treated.

 

[treeseer]

"Well, your example takes the laws to the extreme, but yes, that is the law in most states."

Harry, my reading of Arboriculture and the Law, and Tree Law Cases in the USA, indicates otherwise. What are you basing your opinion on?

 

[Koa Man]

In 1981, the Hawaii Supreme Court, with Chief Justice James Burns presiding, ruled that excessive shade, falling leaves, fruit and flowers on your property from a neighbor's tree did not constitute damage. You can cut back stuff over your property, but you need to dispose of the debris and not throw it back into your neighbor's yard. You also cannot climb any part of the tree in your neighbor's property without their permission. Any trimming you do must be done properly, you cannot just take a pole saw, cut a long limb from the top and have it just rip down the tree. That is damage.

It is always best to talk with the neighbor about the problem and come to an agreement as to how the tree will be pruned. I have done many side trims of property encroachment and I always have my customer talk to the neighbor. If a lateral's point of origin is a couple of feet on the neighbor's side, I explain that it is best for me to cut it there, rather than leave a 2 ft. long stub.

 

[ASD]

here in CA. the tree be longs to the land owner .

if a branch / tree falls on your nabors prop it is an ACT of god

if you touch your nabors tree it is a willful act and you will get you aXX sued off

 

[buff]

foodforest If you have a tree that is encroaching on your neighbor's property, common sense would dictate that you take care of it without even the neighbor having to ask. Do not try to pass the cost on to him and stop being such a pricky neighbor.

 

[foodforests]

Thanks everyone for the replies. Even you buff, from the land of xxx. Thing is, the reason I asked was that I have planted a bunch of trees along a property line, not right on the line, but close enough so that when the trees reach maturity some of the crown will overhang. Mind you, there are already trees that actually do straddle the property line already. Big mango's and such.
So, our neighbour, who is in the process of turning agricultural land into suburbia, building a bunch of mcmansion style structures, is already complaining about the potential for these trees to overhang the property line. I guess they will, in like 2o years or something. YOu'd think he would get the point that we don't want to be looking into his yard or vice versa. Whatever. I guess I am the pricky neighbour in this case...

 

[Koa Man]

I endeavor to be a good neighbor and not let any of my trees encroach my neighbor's property. Actually I only have 1 tree, an avocado and my neighbor tells me to let it grow over as he wants the fruit. It is about 6 ft. over and loaded with avocados right now.

 

[Ekka]

Over here you are allowed to remove any tresspassing tree parts (roots and branches), to be disposed of by you and work to be done at your cost.

However, as mentioned above in a few cases, you'd be in deep **** if you destroyed or killed the tree etc.

Personally, I think it's poor planning and damned inconsiderate of neighbours to plant trees where canopies can tresspass other people properties. Plant appropriately with species and location.

On the other hand it is also unacceptable to plant a perimeter of tall hedge. Screening out peoples views and sunlight etc. In the UK the problem is so severe with that practice (Leylandii cypress) that there is an Anti Social Behaviour Act - Hedge Heights.

Now here's a curly one, what about when a street tree hangs over your front boundary?

 

[treeseer]

Personally, I think it's poor planning and damned inconsiderate of neighbours to plant trees where canopies can tresspass other people properties.

I think it's an act of kindness, to give them an asset to share. of course neighbors should be consulted first. The best situation is to get both parties to agree on the choice, then put them right on the line and share mtc and all.

Now here's a curly one, what about when a street tree hangs over your front boundary?

Some cities want tyou to get a permit before pruning--Raleigh NC for instance. Most here do not regulate, but they too could go after you if the work damaged the tree.

 

[Ekka]

I know what you are saying about sharing an asset but sometimes it can be a hinderence... lots of people have pools and want the sun and no leaves

Neighbours come and go, most of the property line trim jobs I have done is when a new owner moves in and have "plans". These can end up nasty fueds.

Problem is our tenure is short compared to a trees life time, how many owners and neighbours will that tree have?

Why did the diagonal back neighbour plant a Tipuana tree 1m away from the fence-line knowing the canopy spread would be 20m+. Now the new owner is getting a pool and wants a back to fenceline prune ... basically it's everything back to the trunk and the trunk is on a lean over his side anyway ... why didn't that neighbour just plant it smack bang in the middle of their yard and not intrude on anyone? Coz he wants his lawn and open space and doesn't want his whole yard covered with a tree.

Sorry mate, I'll argue this till the cows come home (without lipstick), I've seen too many bad cases and bad neighbours.

Just today I bid a removal for a lady but the tree was in the back neibs yard. a dirty great gum with serious defects, the back neib doesn't care and cant afford to get rid of it ... what if it fails? Oh insurance will cover it ... another great rort, so why should that be a claim if it fails?

Act of nature or act of negligence?

 

[treeseer]

Just today I bid a removal for a lady but the tree was in the back neibs yard. a dirty great gum with serious defects, the back neib doesn't care and cant afford to get rid of it ... what if it fails? Oh insurance will cover it ... another great rort, so why should that be a claim if it fails?

Act of nature or act of negligence?

Here it's an act of negligence if the owner is advised of the hazard and then neglects it. Tell the lady you can write a brief report documenting the hazard and send it certified mail ($2 here)to the owner, copying the town attorney and whoever else you can think of. Usually results in quick action--"can't afford", my foot--budgets open when liability is made clear.