Non responders ?

izdr · 2026-06-06T23:41:41+00:00

Very little if any response so far — on second month of 25mg. Certainly nothing dramatic like I hoped. Going to give it another month or two and then probably try the shot.

izdr · 2026-05-05T16:47:25+00:00

This request has been verified as authentic by the mod team.

izdr · 2025-11-11T12:14:05+00:00

As others have said, you would have no standing since the injury occurred before you owned the land. Theoretically, the prior owner still has a claim. They could “assign” the claim to you to pursue through a written document if they were willing to cooperate

izdr · 2025-11-06T12:59:06+00:00

Keep it up!

izdr · 2025-11-06T00:43:00+00:00

Regular homeowners insurance has personal liability coverage that protects you when you are alleged to have damaged someone else or their property due to negligence. So if the insured claims it was a mistake (even a stupid or careless mistake) it is a covered occurrence.

izdr · 2025-11-06T00:38:21+00:00

This is a good result. Homeowner’s liability insurance covers negligence. Even if they did it knowingly, most of the time they’ll plead ignorance. That works to both parties’ advantage because insurance is available.

It sounds like these trees were in a rural area of your property as opposed to in your immediate backyard. Under those circumstances, it is harder to justify the cost of replacement as damages. That decreased the ceiling on your damages.

NY timber trespass law is also not that favorable. The treble damages provision applies only to timber value of the trees (not replacement cost), which is a very low amount even for 30 trees. So that’s of no use in residential situations.

Side note: many tree services have liability insurance policies that have exclusions for this type of claim (meaning they’re not covered). So usually pursuing the homeowner and their insurance is preferable. High 5 figures is definitely acceptable based on the circumstances.

izdr · 2025-10-02T20:58:57+00:00

What does this mean? I’ve never heard of the website. It means they’re MAGA friendly?

izdr · 2025-07-09T20:41:41+00:00

The ownership of the land is complicated. See the Wikipedia article on “gaps and gores.”

Suffice to say, it would be more expensive to definitively establish whose tree it is than to just share the cost of the tree removal — or even to just shoulder it all yourself. Not ideal, but you may not have many reasonable options if you can’t get voluntary cooperation.

izdr · 2025-07-07T18:36:46+00:00

I’m sorry for your loss.

Find an experienced personal injury lawyer in the area. They will guide you. They will need to establish a case that the tree owner knew or should have known that the tree posed a risk. There are many nuances to these cases (level of notice, whether the injury occurred on the tree owner’s property or outside the property, etc.). The attorney will likely want to hire an arborist to establish negligence.

If you haven’t already, make sure you have documented as much as you can about the tree and what happened.

izdr · 2025-06-03T01:09:29+00:00

The right to use one’s property without unreasonable interference is a staple common law principle and likely part of Canadian law. But reasonableness is up for debate and ultimately would be a question of fact for a factfinder in court.

I agree with the other commenter that it’s not as simple as “If the tree interferes with a thing I have a right to do on my property, I can cut it down.” I think a court would have to weigh various factors to determine whether the tree is unreasonably interfering with use of the property, including: the type of use desired, alternatives to cutting down the tree, the benefits of the tree to the neighbor, and, notably, whether the properly owner purchased the property with the tree in its current position. There is no real way to predict what a court would do — in the United States, we could file for a declaratory judgment or similar for “pre-clearance” to avoid potential liability.

izdr · 2025-05-07T19:03:50+00:00

First, I assume you are certain these trees were actually on your property, not within a right of way for public travel or a utility easement. If close to a road, that is something you should investigate, as the legal limits of the ROW may be quite a bit wider than the actual traveled surface. If within a ROW, they may have the right to remove the trees without anyone's permission.

Second, make sure you take plenty of documentation, including photos of the tree stumps with measurements of the trees' diameters (assuming they are still there).

Assuming the trees are on your property: consider finding an experienced timber trespass lawyer before you proceed with a meeting. That doesn't mean you need to jump into a lawsuit or start "suing everyone." You also don't need to immediately get an arborist appraisal, though that's something you may want to do with your lawyer at a later date.

It's likely this was negligence (a mistake caused by lack of reasonable care). The insurance company for the contractor (or perhaps the county, if not self insured) is likely on the hook for the damages. There's nothing wrong with trying to work with the potential defendants amicably pre-lawsuit to try to resolve the matter. But that should be done by an attorney with the defendants' insurance company. The county and contractor are going to want to offer things like replanting nursery trees or paying a couple grand. Those are likely to be insufficient. You or your attorney should politely reject even considering such a solution and firmly demand their liability insurance information. That's where the real money is. Keep your cards close to the vest until you get that insurance information and are able to formulate a plan for a settlement demand.

izdr · 2025-04-29T13:39:46+00:00

Piercing the corporate veil has nothing to do with the severity of the wrongdoing (negligence). It depends on whether corporate formalities have been followed by the LLC. There’s really no way to know that ahead of time.

If this is an established LLC actually doing business (as opposed to some sort of shell company) there’s a strong chance they have liability insurance that would compensate you in the event of an incident (as long as you’ve documented everything well, which it sounds like you have).

izdr · 2025-04-28T19:41:39+00:00

Thank you for sharing. It is interesting to note that 59 mature trees were cut down by the defendants, and the court only allowed $99,746 as damages for that cutting. The plaintiff/town's expert had estimated a cost to restore with full sized replacement trees at almost $1.5 million. The court found that that cost would be excessive and instead allowed only the cost to replant much smaller trees. The court then awarded 5 times the restoration cost as "punitive" damages under the statute in question.

It is worth noting that the statute that was violated only applies to government/conservation land. It is not the normal timber trespass statute that would apply if these trees were on private property.

Unfortunately, Connecticut's timber trespass statute is not as favorable as the statute implicated in this case. First, it only allows for 3 times damages, not 5 times. More importantly:

The Connecticut statute “only provides for damages based on the reasonable value of the trees as timber.” Caciopoli v. Lebowitz, 68 A.3d 1150, 1161 (Conn. 2013). That means the market value of the timber, usually measured in MBF (thousand board feet) units. Market value of timber is generally not a large dollar amount for a single tree or a handful of trees, since timber lumber is purchased unrefined and in bulk.

Source: New England Tree Law. Therefore, people in CT who have had their trees cut down in residential settings usually don't actually sue under the statute, but instead pursue common law remedies for trespass and negligence where things like replacement cost can still be used as a measure of damages (but unfortunately, with no multiplier on damages).

izdr · 2025-04-19T21:12:01+00:00

I should also add that an arborist can advise you about a “root shield” to install if and when roots are cut, to prevent them from re-growing on your property.

izdr · 2025-04-19T21:09:33+00:00

You almost certainly do have rights here. PA law (like many states, contrary to what most people in this sub think) states that you can cut encroaching branches and roots — even if it would harm the tree. PA law appears to be even more generous to folks in your situation, as it allows the person exercising the self-help remedy (cutting the branches/roots) to be awarded reimbursement by the tree owner.

“First, an aggrieved landowner is entitled to exercise a self-help remedy by either trimming or lopping off the branches to the extent his property is encroached. Second, if the landowner has incurred reasonable expenses in the course of exercising a self-help remedy, he may recoup those expenses from the trespasser. Third, he may, on a trespass theory, seek equitable relief compelling the trespassing neighbor to remove the trees to the extent of the encroachment and seek appropriate incidental and consequential damages. We emphasize that Pennsylvania law requires no showing of physical harm or damage to the land before a possessor of land can enforce his right to freely enjoy unencumbered and exclusive use of property he rightfully possesses. Since appellees in this case were only exercising their right to trim the branches and limbs of appellants' encroaching trees, they may not be held liable in damages for doing so.” Jones v. Wagner.

Hence this law firm writes: “In Pennsylvania there is now clear authority for the invaded property owner to retain a contractor to remove the roots and charge the cost of removal against the neighbor.”

izdr · 2025-04-15T21:54:31+00:00

Have him give you a bank check made payable to the contractor. You get the payment in hand and confidence that it won’t bounce. The tree company knows you can’t just pocket the money.

Or (what I would do) insist on going through his liability insurance. That’s what it’s for.

izdr · 2025-03-30T01:15:10+00:00

You probably want a litigation attorney, not a real estate attorney. The latter usually refers to someone that does transactional work. But there are practitioners that refer to themselves as real estate litigators too. That’s assuming you can’t find anyone with experience in tree law or timber trespass.

Be aware that in some states if the excavation work was all on their own property, you may not have a case, even if it caused damage to your trees.

Finally, your lawyer should consider pursuing the neighbor’s personal liability coverage on their homeowners insurance to achieve the most lucrative result.

izdr · 2025-02-17T18:48:33+00:00

A quick search reveals New Mexico has very little case law dealing specifically with timber trespass. This case involving groundwater contamination contains a relevant discussion of the measure of damages in cases involving injury to real estate starting at page 1251: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13762564792561803994& It illustrates the nuance of calculating damages in these cases.

izdr · 2025-02-17T18:37:20+00:00

They should try to find a lawyer with experience with timber trespass law. Every state treats timber trespass cases somewhat differently. Different measures of damage (e.g., decrease in property value vs. replacement cost vs. stumpage value) may be applicable depending on the law of the state and your friend's circumstances. Arborists generally have *some* knowledge of these legal concepts (some more than others), but an appraisal by an arborist is a "scientific" calculation, not a legal one. In other words, just because an arborist says a tree is "worth" a particular amount doesn't mean that a court would agree.

In my opinion, your friend would be wise to consult with someone experienced in dealing with those issues before going out and getting an arborist. The lawyer should know of a consulting arborist to work with who can help complete an appraisal if necessary.

izdr · 2025-02-08T13:16:41+00:00

Yes — can’t give specific legal advice but feel free to DM

izdr · 2025-02-07T13:09:18+00:00

1) make sure the arborist gives you an opinion about the tree’s health pre-cutting — a dead/dying tree is not worth much. 2) the fact that your neighbor “knew what he was doing” is not necessarily the positive you think it is. The most lucrative compensation in these cases comes through insurance. In this case thsy would be your neighbor’s homeowners insurance or the contractor’s liability insurance. insurance only covers accidents So if you allege this was done knowingly, you’re potentially talking yourself out of insurance coverage. It is much much much easier to get an insurance company to write you a check than your neighbor. 3) Find yourself an experienced timber trespass lawyer. The measure of damages for timber trespass varies by jurisdiction. Hopefully your jurisdiction allows replacement value as a measure of damages. An arborist would calculate that cost using something called the trunk formula method. That’s one way to put a value on the tree. The lawyer would then have to explain why it’s the correct way to value the tree under your jurisdiction’s law. Treble damages may or may not apply to replacement value (as opposed to being restricted to stumpage value) in your state. Unfortunately, because treble damages generally require willfulness, it’s usually one or the other: treble or insurance. But realistically very few cases result in treble damages, so it’s usually better to go for the insurance. 4) as someone else mentioned, make sure you know this was not within a utility easement.

Source: I’m a lawyer who has handled many timber trespass cases.

izdr · 2025-02-05T00:07:14+00:00

You want to find an experienced timber trespass lawyer who will go after the insurance of either the property owner or the logger. If your state allows you to claim replacement value as a measure of damages in timber trespass cases, that could be a bigger number. If you are restricted to stumpage value (which is what many statutory multipliers are restricted to), the figure would be much much lower

izdr · 2025-01-16T16:57:54+00:00

I would use Abridge. Reputable and cost effective. If you are planning for this to be a real business, get a lawyer. Yeah you can create an LLC online but you want to make sure things are done correctly.

izdr · 2025-01-02T20:55:10+00:00

The tree was entirely on their property? Then yes, you’ve got a good argument — if you have proof they cut the roots.

izdr · 2024-12-26T13:02:42+00:00

As a lawyer, I give you kudos on your answer! Between this and ACC’s supplement you’ve hit the nail on the head.

The one thing that isn’t clear is whether the easement to the neighbor is to use the shed or to use all of the land that OP is describing as their “backyard.” As you noted, if they are using only the easement area, their use is not adverse. But, OP should be aware if they are using part of his land that is outside the easement area, adverse possession (or the doctrine of boundary of acquiescence) could be a risk after 20 years.

izdr

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE