Legal Implications

[vharrison2]

Like I mentioned in the ISA/TCIA thread the ISA Florida Chapter offers nice educational programs. They have a Hazard Tree Workshop coming up that we will be attending in Ft.Lauderdale, but not until Aprill 22, and I have a problem today! Here is the situation: we are trimming 2 black olives and the homeowner wants us to stump grind some of the roots to these living trees so he can lay sod. The trees are 16" dbh and 20-25' tall. We have decided not to do this for a couple of reasons; it could compromise the integrity of the tree in the event of a storm leaving us with legal liabilities and at this point in the game we don't have any type of disclaimer that I am comfortable with that would release our Arborist or the company. Any thoughts?

 

[NeTree]

I'd say you made the right choice.

I'd add that mulching would be far more beneficial to the health of the tree than grass competing for resources.

 

[treeseer]

I'd say you made the right choice. I'd add that mulching would be far more beneficial to the health of the tree than grass competing for resources.

Erik's right; I would add the possibility of adding porous topsoil and planting turf above the rootzone.

Roots can be pruned, but timing and dose are critical in retaining anchorage.

 

[NeTree]

Oh..., as for the liability... if your actions caused the tree to die, why WOULDN'T you be liable for the replacement cost?

 

[treeseer]

it could compromise the integrity of the tree in the event of a storm leaving us with legal liabilities and at this point in the game we don't have any type of disclaimer that I am comfortable with that would release our Arborist or the company.

No dosclaimer will unconditionally release liability concern. The best solution is to add soil between the roots and plant another groundcover besidesturf in it, then mulch.

liability may be partially released if you cited chapter and verse about how your method of root pruning was responsible, prudent etc. Considering the litter nuisance form those things, expanding mulch sounds like the way to go anyway.

 

[vharrison2]

Oh..., as for the liability... if your actions caused the tree to die, why WOULDN'T you be liable for the replacement cost?

That is the whole thing, you would be liable. We are providing expert advise to the DA in a case right now. A neighbor girdled another neighbors mahagony. Took the bark off all the way around and the tree died. Of course the neighbor that owned the tree LOVED that tree and went to the police. The guy that girdled is about to be charged with a felony because of the worth/replacement value.

 

[vharrison2]

liability may be partially released if you cited chapter and verse about how your method of root pruning was responsible, prudent etc. Considering the litter nuisance form those things, expanding mulch sounds like the way to go anyway.[/QUOTE]

Exactly why we did not do it...there would be nothing responsible or prudent about it. Sometimes educating the client is what you have to do when they want to do fool things!

 

[treeseer]

The guy that girdled is about to be charged with a felony because of the worth/replacement value.

Did you write the appraisal? These cases often get dropped or settled along the way, and if there are fines they may be reduced by a board of adjustment. If a reporter or citizen follows the case it is less likely to go away. Please post the case citation and links to info if you have it.

 

[vharrison2]

Our biologist and lead arborist provided the information on how the tree died, all the scientific stuff involved and then John provided the appraisal on the trees worth and replacement value. I will get the case citation today. So far it has not been in the papers...but all that would take is an email. We live in a very small county. The DA here has never prosecuted anything like this and frankly was not anxious to move forward, but the owner of the tree has been very persistent.

 

[treeseer]

The DA here has never prosecuted anything like this and frankly was not anxious to move forward, but the owner of the tree has been very persistent.

Good for them; lawyers need a push sometimes to get into new territory. If the perp entered the property uninvited to do the deed, that's trespassing.which is a crime on its own. Arboriculture and the Law book states that FL has no statute specifically regarding injuries to trees, but that book is 13 years old now.

Case law is a big deal; the owner or their consultant or advocate should research this.