This could get interesting.

[Toddppm]

This area is great if you're a lawyer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/14/AR2007091401340.html

 

[M.D. Vaden]

This area is great if you're a lawyer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/14/AR2007091401340.html

If this decision doesn't get overturned somehow, it could start a situation with real estate deals, similar to every home having to have a new 10 year lithium battery in the smoke detectors.

I'd be immediately checking in with real estate agents if I was a consulting arborist, with copies of the article, and the legal judgements. Its very possible that this could become a regular part of home inspection before buying houses.

Consulting arborists could make more than the attorneys, because arborists may end up working for lawyers as well as real estate agents or home buyers. Possibly even insurers.

 

[treeseer]

Consulting arborists could make more than the attorneys, because arborists may end up working for lawyers as well as real estate agents or home buyers. Possibly even insurers.

Don't hold your breath. I don't think the ruling changes much; the HI rule is not so different than the MA rule, at the end of the tree.
It takes a woman with 3 last names to sue for that kind of money. Preposterous.

Thanks for linking the story tho--the big news imo is that one state court looked to a ruling 6 time zones away as precedent. Hmmm....

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Do you think Fagella hired Saunders company to do the removal?

 

[OTG BOSTON]

Wait 'till Ekka gets a hold of this

On a serious note I have brought up this issue to my Boss several times. Being the Parks Dept., we have LOTS of "neighbors", and lots of complaints about trees growing on borderlines of and out of our Parks. It is my contention that we don't need to address these issues, according to the laws of Massachusetts (I've become a bureaucrat, I know)

I always get shot down because we are a public service and are here to serve the people...........:bang:

 

[Toddppm]

It takes a woman with 3 last names to sue for that kind of money. Preposterous....

I saw that and can picture the type of self absorbed pretentious Lexus driving/starbucks drinking woman that would do this.

Ekka should love it.

 

[Joshua]

That is insane.
The if the tree was there before the house then what happens ?
If I built a house next to my neighbors tree on the boundary, can
I then sue to cut his tree down because it is damaging my house?

Personally I prefer trees to houses.
A house can be built in a year.
A tree takes years to grow.

 

[Justice]

OTG.. just curious... your saying you loose those battles?

I refuse to cut down tree's all the time. Being in the same situation as you, the bureaucracy is a Big PITA. I am lucky that I win most of the time, as I refer all the live tree removal requests to Shade Tree Commission. They refuse (usually) and that is the end.. for me anyway. Trimming is usually my call and I trim to ANSI standards so, so far so good.

I agree, this type of law if BAD for tree's. Every large tree left is at risk, when there are fewer everyday. To me it makes no sense. The tree's will be the BIG losers.

 

[ATH]

Still no mention of how proper building practices can eliminate many tree-structure problems (for example correct backfill around the basement and root barriers when you see a tree next door...). When is somebody going to place at least some of the blame on the builders?

 

[ropensaddle]

Yes builders around here do destruction to trees and
when they sell the house the owners end up with
big dead trees from compaction and trunk damage
created by construction.
I would however feel your neighbor should be responsible
for damages originating from his property and planting themes
could alleviate many issues by careful selections near boarders.
I have a problem with the neighbors dogs spooking the deer
and getting in my trash and am going to be trapping coon and
coyote this year. I will tell him but if he doesn't put them up
oh well!

 

[ATH]

I would however feel your neighbor should be responsible
for damages originating from his property and planting themes
could alleviate many issues by careful selections near boarders.

I didn't catch the order of the case at hand, was the tree there first or the neighbor's house?

When somebody plants a sweetgum in a 17x17 back yard, yes, they are asking to cause problems. HOWEVER, if you build right next to my existing tree, why is that now my problem?

 

[ropensaddle]

I would however feel your neighbor should be responsible
for damages originating from his property and planting themes
could alleviate many issues by careful selections near boarders.

I didn't catch the order of the case at hand, was the tree there first or the neighbor's house?

When somebody plants a sweetgum in a 17x17 back yard, yes, they are asking to cause problems. HOWEVER, if you build right next to my existing tree, why is that now my problem?

Good question but why should it crashing through the roof of
your neighbors house not be your responsibility as you could have took
steps to prevent it. Cabling and bracing or taking the tree out now
if it were a beautiful walnut or the like would be worth effort to keep
the tree sweetgum is a weed as I see it.
I won't live in the city because of the hateful neighbor syndrome
I have witnessed this too many times to count seems the close quarter
living creates hatred toward your neighbor!

 

[ATH]

....I have witnessed this too many times to count seems the close quarter
living creates hatred toward your neighbor!

No doubt about that!

 

[OTG BOSTON]

OTG.. just curious... your saying you loose those battles?
.

I should have been more clear. What happens is people who live next to parks call and complain about limbs/trees over their property line. I believe (according to the law) we should let them PRUNE as they wish, as long as industry standards are followed.

 

[ropensaddle]

I should have been more clear. What happens is people who live next to parks call and complain about limbs/trees over their property line. I believe (according to the law) we should let them PRUNE as they wish, as long as industry standards are followed.

But what if those said trees fall on your neighbors house
should the responsibility not be the tree owners?

 

[OTG BOSTON]

But what if those said trees fall on your neighbors house
should the responsibility not be the tree owners?

If the tree is healthy and free of defects then it would be considered an act of god.

Other than that the "neighbor" would have to notify the "tree owner" in writing for any type of damages to be paid out.

 

[jntrees]

Hey guys, I was the climber seen in the pic on the crane. No, I am not Saunders,the newspaper screwed that up. Our guy had to go to court several times to testify regarding the tree. I am in favor of the ruling by the way. It makes perfect sense. If you just spent 500.000.00 on a townhouse and found out your neighbors tree was causing your retaining wall to fall, you'd probably want it removed too. The tree was otherwise perfectly healthy, but ground penetrating radar showed roots pushing against the wall. Yeah, she went all out!
I think the problem started when our client approached the neighbor and aggressively demanded he do something. He refused and then thats when it started.

 

[moss]

Trees near property lines give neighbors something to fight about, they just love to do it. And of course trees always grow on or near property lines. It usually comes down to money, one side wants the other side to spend it.

If the homeowner buys a property and discovers a tree problem after the purchase is finalized I don't see how they have a right to complain, it was their responsibility to do a pre-purchase inspection. The tree predates their occupation of the property, they're going to have to negotiate with the neighbor to come to a solution. At least that's what I'd rule if I was the judge. If the neighbor doesn't cooperate tough luck, the recent purchaser is a newcomer to a situation that they ignored at their peril. Perhaps they should be suing the former owner, the real estate broker and the home inspector first. They all have a responsibility (morally ethical not legal) to be aware of potential problems with the property and to be upfront with the buyer (hah! when hell freezes over).
-moss

 

[jntrees]

I agree, there are many things that could have been done differently. Communication is the key here. It's all in how you approach people. She could have kindly explained her situation with the tree roots and the retaining wall and offered to pay half or foot the whole bill and buy a nice little Japanese maple or something.
But the point is, if something on your property is causing damage to your neighbors property whether it be a house or wall, I think you are ultimately responsible.
Know this, her patio sat about 5 feet or so below her neighbors, separated by a retaining wall that was about to collapse. It wasn't some cute little wall out in the yard somewhere. This thing was gonna collapse into her yard possibly injuring or killing someone.

 

[DDM]

I would think that the retaining wall problem would have been included in the home inspection.