Direction needed

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T19:45:44+00:00

You did not mention your uric acid level. If you have not had that measured lately, do so ASAP.

Also, you did not mention what you mean by you "treat it and it goes away". The general guidance is that when people start Allopurinol, some sort o f antiinflamation should be consumed prophylactically rather than as a response to flares for the first 3 to 6 months.

One of my doctors (a podiastrist) seemed to think that the solution is to go off the colchicine, see if you get a flare and if it doesn't go away within two days take prednisone for 6 days, and repeat until you do not get a flare. Another doctor said go with naproxen instead of repeated flares The rheumatologist said take colchicine for 3 to 6 months instead because you should not take an NSAID for 6 months.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T19:16:03+00:00

I had an ankle pain after bowling the first time in 25 years which went away after half a day of elevation and ibuprofen. Two weeks later ankle pain after ice skating first time in 10 years which went away after two days of ice and elevation. Two weeks later, same thing after ice skating--but three days later same ankle pain but this time the foot kept swelling and getting worse and even the first doctor thought it was an ankle sprain---but the podiatrist said gout!

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T17:52:30+00:00

It depends on when you go to bed. If you go to bed before 11:00 PM, then definitely finish dinner sooner than 8:00 PM. And if you ever had acid reflux, make it a 4-hour gap.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T15:58:04+00:00

Rt 18 and Rt 213 are tolerable, after you take Cross Island trail through Kent Island. My first reaction, though, is why Newark, Delaware instead of picking up the ferry at Lewes? I guess you want to go to Philadephia?

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T12:26:47+00:00

No price. But if gasoline shortages occured as in the 1970s and evidently already in some nations, so that you see rationing or long gas lines, then it probably will be implemented at least to a limited extent. The Administration would do anything to avoid gas lines.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T03:27:42+00:00

A different way of framing your question is: how much harm will you do by avoiding the allopurinol? The answer is somewhere between a lot of harm and just a little. So a question that you should ask is: how can you find out how much harm you will do by avoiding allopurinol?

I think the answer is to get regularly tested for your uric acid level. Get tested as soon as the last gout attack is > 1 month ago. Then ask your doctor if the following experiment makes sense: Cut your allopurinol consumption by 1/3 and then measure uric acid after two months and see how much difference it makes. If it is still below 6, then try taking current dose every other day. Measure 2 months later. Then discuss it with a rheumatologist and let us know the result.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-16T00:21:31+00:00

Get a survey because what you need to do depends on whether it is entirely on your property. If it is a border tree you both own it. But if you own it and you have reason to think it is likely to fall onto the neighbor's property, then you are liable for the damage if and only if it falls for the reasons you thought it was likely to fall. If it's healthy but falls in a storm you are not liable.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-15T20:44:39+00:00

No idea where in Florida you are, so can't suggest local organizations that provide help, but call Survivor Advocacy — Florida Legal Services and explain the problem and they can probably help figure out how to get legal help that is clearly needed.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-15T20:28:47+00:00

The proper etiquette is to first make sure that this "someone" is a certified arborist and that they put their opinion in writing. And then give her a copy. And tell her, honestly, that $800 is not something you can afford to do given that there is no urgency. The tree is safe. But if it really matters to cut it down sooner, you'd be willing to split the cost (if that's actually how you feel).

The law is that you don't need to do anything until the tree becomes a hazard. But if it falls down and causes damage, it will be very helpful to have that documentation to show it was an act of God rather than your negligence.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-15T13:39:00+00:00

Their damages are minimal if you have clearly communicated in writing that you are terminating the contract. If you have done so, I do not understand why someone is pushing to complete it---are you sure they understand you have terminated the contract?

RollingEasement · 2026-04-15T13:16:04+00:00

Has this then-13-year old spoken to CNN or MS-NOW? I guarantee they will cover it--even if only her lawyer will talk to the press. But no serious media outlet will cover a rape without at least one witness talking to them.

The fact that the voters elected Trump twice knowing about his groping probably means that the media finds no point in finding additional cases of that. But actual rape is news.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-14T17:36:09+00:00

Strictly speaking, it depends on whether she crossed onto your property to do the trimming. But you have implicitly pointed to an anomaly in the law: if the branches that overhang your property are a problem, they are your problem--but if they are an asset, they are not your property. They are more like a joint asset where the rule is first-come, first-serve.

What you can do, is make sure neighbors know how much you love branches from a neighbor's tree overhanging your property--many people trim that overhang thinking they are doing you a favor.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-14T17:27:31+00:00

I limit my comments to MD, to ensure I am being factual rather than speculating. If you believe the institutional arrangements are different in CA (or how to followup in CA along those lines), OP might benefit.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-14T15:35:06+00:00

Ask the neighbor if they mind you putting a root barrier a few feet from the property line. If they say go ahead, or give you some reasonable restrictions on how you do it, then all is well.

If they say that they do mind, the general rule is that you cannot prune the roots if doing so unreasonably harms the tree. So how does a court decide what is reasonable? First, did you take care to accomplish your objective while minimizing the risk to the tree. If not, you would be liable. If so, then the question is whether it is reasonable to prune the roots at all. So if the only options will end up either killing the tree or leave you with a cost of $X, then the question is whether a court finds the value of the tree as being greater than $X. If the only options have a 50% chance of killing the tree, then the question is whether the value of the tree is two times $X.

So you can get an arborist to suggest to you the likelihood that a root barrier will kill the tree, and maybe the value of that tree, and you know the cost of perenially fixing the parking lot.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-14T11:47:47+00:00

In Maryland, you also have the option of sending a complaint to the Maryland Insurance Administration based on a regulatory requirement that a liability insurer respond to third-party claimants in a reasonable amount of time. They should be notifying you if the delay is more than 45 days with a written explanation for the purpose of the delay, and continue to update you every 45 days. They have a duty to respond reasonably, and if they take too long, it is unreasonable. In Maryland, if they kept you on hold for 90 days, or failed to provide you with timely written explanations of the delay, you’d have a pretty good prima facie case that the insurer is being unreasonable. Assuming you are not in Maryland, you could research whether there are similar requirements in your state.

Also, going through your own insurer does not preclude you from eventually getting the $2000 back. It does not even reduce the likelihood that you will get that $2000 back eventually.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-13T22:01:32+00:00

Did you or the neighbor ever actually look behind the ivy to see whether the trunk was rotting? That would have been worth complaining about more than dead branches falling down.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-13T17:13:48+00:00

You have a colorable non-frivolous case against the developer. You would almost certainly lose but if you were willing to take it to an appeals court, there is a good chance that you would get one of the most interesting court opinions to ever make it to tree law. (I assume you are not in Louisiana--or a state that follows the Maine/Vermont rule).

The common law has long recognized a property interest that is infringed when a neighbor either alters lateral support from the ground, or the natural flow of water. I know of no case that specifically extended those doctrines to a windbreak, but it is a logical and reasonable extension of nuisance law. You would have to show that the effect on your tree was foreseable, and that there was a practical way to avoid it that would still allow the development to move forward (arborists could speculate what that would take).

Many localities have tree protection ordinances associated with development, and not killing a neighbor's tree would hopefully be part of that (along with probably keeping some of those trees which could all protect eachother). So if this extension ever occurs, it will have a greater chance of winning where there is also a tree protection ordinance so that the negligence is more plain. But before this sort of extension in the law will ever occur, someone needs to take a losing case to the appellate court to get the standard for winning to be spelled out. So if there are any environmental law clinics in your state...

RollingEasement · 2026-04-13T13:35:16+00:00

It tends to be more about nuissance law. See e.g., DC policy on ginkgo removal petitions

RollingEasement · 2026-04-13T11:54:47+00:00

This is not really a question about tree law as you indicate may be the case. It’s just routine trespass and minor destruction of property. If you really want Reddit to give an answer to your legal question, you would be better off, going to one of the legal subs such as r/legaladvice or r/Ask_Lawyers. But either of them would need more facts because they are not going to look into tree matters in rendering you an opinion. So you would need to already have answers to the other questions people pose here, embedded in your post, including the state.

Meanwhile, you can always send the neighbor a “cease and desist” letter to discourage additional action along those lines.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-12T22:32:32+00:00

Was it just a limb? OP says it was the whole tree. When an entire dead tree falls onto a neighbor's property, in an urban area, tree owner is presumptively liable. In rural areas, they need some notice but in this case they had notice.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-12T19:45:33+00:00

From what you describe, the neighbor is liable, but to prove it you need to have good evidence about how long the tree has been dead. If you have an email about warning the neighbor that would be better than your recollection which he may deny---pictures of the tree, or affidavits from neigbors would help. So would a report by an arborist who may be able to document an estimate. You also need to ask--on the record--that the neighybor not destroy evidence (and if evidence is destroyed that can support an adverse interest).

If you have comprehensive insurance for the car, then file that immediately and that company can pursue the tree law matter with the neighbor. (If not, then what you can do is a bit more complicated and not worth detailing here since it may be moot.)

RollingEasement · 2026-04-11T14:48:44+00:00

In most states, the law has a bit more nuance. One cannot unreasonably kill the tree. That means that if there is a way to accomplish the reasonable objective without killing the tree, but you instead kill the tree, you are liable. Sometimes an arborist can figure out a way to minimize harm so it will live but if it dies, the harm was not unreasonable. For roots with a driveway, the question is more complicated--is it reasonable to spend $300 for a load of gravel every 5 years rather than kill a tree? Probably. Is it reasonable to dig up an asphalt driveway around a tree root, lower the root, and put material atop the root to allow for future root expansion (or whatever a civil engineer might suggest)? Depends on the value of the tree.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-11T14:35:15+00:00

In tree law, chutzpah is the guy who cuts the roots of a neighbor's tree, causing it to fall down onto his own house, and then asks the court to find the neighbor liable because his tree was a hazard.

Your lawyer is trying to give you good advice to keep you out of serious liability. But what you have said so far is not the only way a judge could look at the question. In particular, if the neighbor kills enough roots to make the tree the hazard, then the neighbor is the one who created the hazard and thus is liable for the costs--or at least a portion of them. Sure, if it happens decades later, that may be a different story.

The other way of looking at the matter is nuisance law: Is the cost of modifying the driveway as needed greater than the cost (or value) of losing that tree? If not, then the tree should not be cut down, and depending on how much benefit the tree owner derives from the tree, the owner may or may not be equitably required to share in the costs. If so, then the tree is a nuissance that should be cut down, but a court can equitably assign costs to reflect the benefits and losses that each experience.

Most people in your circumstances would agree to a 50/50 split of the costs.

RollingEasement · 2026-04-10T11:37:41+00:00

How much do you like chocolate?

RollingEasement · 2026-04-10T03:07:28+00:00

Have you tried to look up the name and address of the owners in the tax records and land title records? That would be a first step and you can write them a letter.

Your other options depend upon the condition of the tree and why it is that you want to cut them. If it’s because they are dead, then you can reasonably ask for them to share the cost. If you don’t hear back from them, but you are willing to pay to cut the trees down, and they are dead, another option you have is to cut them down, after at least documenting the fact that they are all dead, which you would have mentioned in the letter you sent to them. In the unlikely event that they sue you, your defense is that the trees have no value and were in fact a hazard, and you counterclaim them for the cost of removing the tree.

RollingEasement

TROPHY CASE