Couple sue over damage to trees

[NeTree]

Neb, she didn't quote the statute, the writer of the article did. It was a cut'n'paste from the Eagle-Tribune (online paper).

 

[Dadatwins]

Originally posted by TreeCo
The city needs to write better contracts with it's sub contractors to protect it's and it's citizens trees. Maybe the city needs to sue the contractor if they are city trees.

That would only solve part of the problem, I work for a city and know that the contracts are written to protect the city trees but the Inspector who is supposed to be checking on the progress at each stage of the job rarely shows up until the damage is done and usually does not know what they are inspecting anyway.
If the trees were in the city right of way the so-called arborist should have check the site to protect the trees as an advocate for the trees in the city. If they were on private property, sad for the homeowner and hope a large $$$ will help replant what was lost.

 

[JJackson]

I have seen easement agreements that dont make detailed notes on trees, and these were from a power company.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Cut out and taken Off Topic like I said I would. See ya there...

 

[NeTree]

Originally posted by Tom Dunlap
So...if tree huggers can't build houses from wood, does that mean anyone who voted for Shrub should be conscripted for duty in Iraq?

Bad logic...

Sorry if this is hijacking

Whoa... you did NOT go there...

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Sheeeesh...

Lighten up a little Loosen your hat , I know that you're able to carry on a courteous dialog.

I was making light of logic, AND I apologized for a possible hijacking. It seems like anyone else can stray from the topic at hand and it's OK. Why the vent?

Maybe it would be better to say that people who support abo...nope, not gonna go there either!

I'm going to try and cut out my reply and take it OT. How about taking yours along too?

Tom

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Back on topic

It will be interesting to see how this might play out in court. I bet a case can be made for the damages even if the trees were in an easement. Since professionals are held to a higher standard of duty it seems like people who contract the excavating might be expected to know that piling dirt on the trees would damage them.

If those same trees were smashed by a run away car I'll bet that an attorney would be able to collect damages. Even if someone planted them in the public median.

Tom

 

[geofore]

damage/trees

www.prairielaw.com Real Estate messageboard, this topic comes up on occasion. I would have pulled surveyors report and notes/maps to see if this was an easement from wayback when before it got this far. With all the new housing plans going in around here the easements will play a part in tree removal. You would be surprised at how many new home buyers buy the lots without having a survey done, they take the sellers word for where the lines are. A big mistake not to have the survey done and monuments/pins placed. A lot of times the seller does not tell you where the easements are to make the lot look bigger to get a better price and years down the road when repairs or upgrades are done your landscape pays the price.

 

[Noble Zone]

Suing bad urban loggers

I would be very interested in how this case turns out since I'm in a similar situation. Our power co. has a 40 foot easement on each side of the utility line. My property is 80 x 100. There are lines on two sides of my property. That means their easement is 3/4 of my property. My yard is only 15 feet, so their easement includes my livingroom, office, Bedroom, shop, and garage.
The utility sent urban loggers out to butcher my trees. I've been in the house for 25 years and the trees are trimmed every 3 to 5 years (except my cedar, it doesn't threaten the lines). This time they topped the cedar and mutilated a maple. I'm suing. That is if I can find a lawyer who is willing to take on the almighty power co.
We've been in negotiations. Their last offer was to replace my 60 - 100 year old trees with saplings and pay $500.00. Before that, they offered to plant saplings in a local park in our honor. Isn't that sweet! Idiots! Our local park is a National Forest.
They keep putting off and delaying. That's their plan. Ignore it long enough and it'll go away. I don't go away. I expect this case to take two years and I expect I'll win. An easement gives them the right to occupy, not destroy. Although they broke many rules published in our GA Dept. of Transportation Utility Accommodations Standards and Specifications Guide, I live on a county road and not a state road. Our county has no rules...no regulating authority... and very little sense of justice when it comes to trees.
I've never heard about the reverse condemnation thing, although I did suggest to the power company that they take over payments of my house since they have a right to everything except my kitchen, bathroom, and 10x10 back yard. I'll have to check into that. I've been checking state laws which say I can only sue for damages. That's the utility co. I can still sue the consulting firm that was hired by the utility and the tree service that was hired by the consulting firm.
Here's the problem I'm having. Can't find a qualified lawyer. The only one I've found is Randall Stamen arborist/attorney in California. That's just about the other side of the world. Does anyone out there know a tree loving attorney in Georgia, Tennessee, or Alabama?

 

[NeTree]

What's wrong with urban loggers?


I think the "$500 and replace the trees" was pretty reasonable, considering.


Frankly, you're starting to sound like the kind of bitter person who just lives to find something to sue over/b!tch about. maybe THAT'S why you can't find an attorney to take the case.

 

[treeman45246]

These 60-100 year old trees are the same ones you posted pics of over at treehelp a few months ago? The link is gone, but you were talking about a couple of silver maples and an Atlantic White Cedar, right? I'd take the $500 and the saplings. An easement gives the power company the right to prune, and even a bad hack-em-up job is within the confines of the law in many cases. Right tree, right place - end of story. This sue everyone and everything over a poorly placed tree is a waste of time and money - only the lawyer is making any money on this one.

 

[Noble Zone]

Such foul language

Erik,

Why is it necessary to use such foul language and call people names to get your point across? I have never in my life sued anyone and I'm not a female dog.
Homeowners insurance pays $500.00 per tree for damage claims. It'll cost me $1250.00 to have the trees removed and $150.00 for stump grinding. 25 gallon replacement trees will cost around $600.00. And, misc. landscaping would be another $200.00. $500 is not a reasonable offer nor is 5 gallon saplings.
I've talked to two kinds of lawyers; those that are too scared to take on the big dogs and those who want to sue for 1.5 million in punitive damages. Although 1.5 million would be nice, that's not what this is about and I'm not turning this into that type of case. It ain't McDonalds and I didn't get burned. (Although there is more to that case than the media told us. 750+ previous burn complaints on record before anyone sued. Someone had to stand up and say, "STOP IT! I'm proud of the woman who did.") I'm not bitter. It's not in my nature. I do, however, believe in the purpose of tort and it's my turn to stand up and say, "STOP IT!" Someone has to make a stand or urban loggers will continue to show disrespect for trees and their owners.
Seems to me, you are the one who is bitter. Every reply to every post that has your name on it seems bitter. Did a tree fall on your dog when you were a child? What caused this deep rooted hatred you have for trees and reputable arborist?
What's wrong with urban loggers, you ask. Well, they use unnecessarily bad language and, apparently, they are prejudice against red necks and tree lovers. The type of classy people I'd call All-American and be proud to associate with!

 

[jimmyq]

I dont think Erik called you a female dog, he said that " you're starting to sound like the kind of bitter person who just lives to find something to sue over/b!tch about. ". Were you aware of the easement when you inhabited the property in question? If so, then I don't see the real big problem, power companies have easements in order to manage the vegetation to their needs, to continue to provide power to homeowners like yourself. If you dont like it, live in a place without power, or a place without trees, if you choose not to, you have chosen to live in a place where the two must co-exist. It may be a shame that the trees you had were "butchered". Can you describe the butchering? Was it cosmetic or excessively harmful to the longevity of the trees in question? If the people that were hired to do the work were not qualified then you should pursue the power company to hire people that know what they are doing, like Erik. It is the goal of any reputable tradesperson to have a set of standards followed by their so called peers, there are rules and regulations to follow for us as arborists and for ROW clearance work, help us to enforce those rules and regulations and we all win, including the trees.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by netree
So, the power company was well within their rights to do what they did. Even so, they offered to replace the trees and pay her five bills apiece. No wonder no attorney will take up the case; she simply has no basis whatsoever.

Erik, you just flunked Reading Comprehension 101: No one ever said "apiece"; it was $500 TOTAL. Typical slimeball lowball from the utility.

I'm glad you linked that old thread; here's some of it:

"Erik, if you're pointing to teeny holes made by a little birdie and telling people "it was probably going to be dead long before it ever got near the lines" then you are mongering fear, on the order of saying ants make trees unsafe.
That is pushing removals by exaggerating a very common little pest into Godzilla."


Mr. "Love"ll: "I just don't like people like YOU. You came here for our expert opinions, yet insisted we didn't know what we were talking about."

Erik, your opinion was wrong, but NobleZone did not disagree with you; I did. Your Ronald McDonald attacks on her make no sense; unless it's related in some way to the root pruning on the leaning elm in

Difference there of course is that the damage was part of the work designed and ordered by the owner...

What would you do if a tree that you valued highly got butchered like that cedar? Removing all that plant material for no reason and topping-destroying that ornamental was an injury that can and should be compensated, whatever the easement story is.

 

[geofore]

The pictures

Those do not look like High voltage lines calling for a forty foot right-of-way on either side of the poles. Those appear to be residential lines(12.5k or less). Right-of way 23' total or 12'6" either side of the poles or wires. If I were you I'd find out if the street didn't have a 100' right-of-way and the trees are on the streets ROW. If the trees are on the streets ROW you lose in court. Anytime a wire goes over/near your property, telephone lines included, if it has a ROW your trees get trimmed. Without a surveyor's report, you don't even consider sueing because you don't know what you do or do not own. If there is a sewer, water or gas line ROW to your house and those trees are on it you lose. The trees can be removed/trmmed at anytime for maintainence. The problem you have is you don't know where the ROWs are or how wide they are. My guess is the trees along the street are on the street's ROW and the phone line is close enough your cedar is on the ROW. A proper survey will cost you about 2-3k for the report, map and monument placement. Only then will you know for sure. As it stands now, the $500 and tree replacement sounds very reasonable. You hire the lawyer after the survey is done not before. So get out your wallet and hire that surveyor and find out, don't whine about it. It's not your fight if the trees are on someone elses ROW. I've had homeowners show me their gun collection over tree removal on ROWs. I refer the matter to the local police and offer the homeowner they can showoff their gun collection to the police when they come to explain where the ROWs are. Get the facts first, you may have no claim to the trees to sue in the first place, they may sit on a ROW!

 

[Newfie]

If the case came even remotely close to having any merit you would have an attorney jumping all over it. The only attorney you can find wants to sue for millions because he knows it is the only way it will be worth his time to drag on a prolonged campaign to get the power company to cave in to your extrodinary demands.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

If your opinions were based on experience they may be closer to truth. Similar easement cases have settled for 5 figures. on one the utility pruned/butchered in their easement, then offered $5k. If they had every right to control that easement, they wouldn't have offered anything, would they?

The case has dragged on for 2 years, the utility has tried every dirty trick in the book and failed. I'l post when it is tried or settled. The lack of useful lawyers for these cases is soleoly a function of their lack of tree knowledge.

Erik your wild and contradictory statements do not even merit a reply, but they do merit a new poll.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Get the survey then talk to a consulting arborist who has expericance in ROW damage. Guy might know someone in your area, otherwise there is the ASCA website.

ROW easements give the right to control vegitation I did not have tie to look at the pics or anything but this thread.

I'm all for people trying to add to legal president.

 

[Noble Zone]

Easement

The property is on a county road within a subdivision. Every house on the street has a 15' front yard. 4 houses have utility poles and lines. I own the corner lot in the middle of the subdivision. It is 20' smaller than the other lots in the subdivision. The county has a 32' ROW (16' from center) that extends 6.5' into my yard. The trees are at least 2 foot outside their ROW. The sewer and water are on the other side of the road and their ROW does not extend into my yard. My property was surveyed by the county 3 years ago when the sewer was installed and the road was rebuilt. All corners, except the back, were marked and the markers are still there. The back is bordered by fences so we pretty much know where that line is. The power lines are not extremely high voltage because they only power this subdivision's 9 houses.
The actual butcher said he cut the cedar because it was "close" to the phone line. He also doesn't know his lines. Cable was the closest line. The VPO of the power company said they do not perform vegetation management for the phone nor cable lines. This is evident by the trimming above those lines along the highway (because there are state laws) and city streets (also regulated).
I signed the easement (if it exists) 25 years ago when I first requested power. It is one sentence in the contract that you MUST sign for service. I asked our recently oust Senator and our current County Commissioner (both of whom live in the area) if they were aware of the easement they had signed. They were not. If they are unaware that they signed such a thing, why would I be expected to know about it. I've asked almost every customer who comes in my store if they are aware of the easement. I've yet to find one person who knows that they were coerced into signing such a thing.
The power company can not provide a legible copy of the contract they say I signed because it is on microfiche. They refuse to give me a blank copy of the contract for my file. They have shown me Gayle Morrison's contract. That is the only legible contract I've seen and they say it is the same contract EVERYONE signs to get power. I don't know Gayle Morrison and I believe showing me her contract would be against some privacy law. But, that's her problem.
If I had known about the easement, I probably would not have bought the property 25 years ago. There is no easement on file with the property office, tax accessor's office, or any state or county office; not for electricity, telephone, nor cable...there is, however, DOT ROW and Water/Sewer on file. The only thing saying there is a 40 foot easement is Gayle Morrison's contract. He address isn't near mine. It was dated years after mine. The power co's attorney says the easement is in the by-laws. The by-laws state "Each applicant or member shall, upon being requested so to do by the Cooperative, execute and deliver to the Cooperative grants of easement or right-of-way over, on and under such lands owned or leased by or mortgaged to the member, and in accordance with such reasonable terms and conditions, as the Cooperative shall require for the furnishing of electric service to him or other members or for the construction, operation, maintenance or relocation of the Cooperative's electric facilities." I can't quote what is on the contract I signed because they won't give me a copy!

 

[Guy Meilleur]

A lawyer, who gets paid by the word, or maybe the letter.

What in particular do you find crappy? Sounds like boilerplate to me but then I'm not a lawyer.