Neighbor's dead tree is leaning against my oak and threatening to fall on my property

My family and I often camp when we look for a suitable camp site trees like this is one of the first things we consider. They are called "widow makers".

Jimmie

When it is a safety issue, or the owner ignores orders to do something - like mow high weeds - the city might do it and sue the owner. If the city orders removal and the owner(s) fail to comply, then it probably goes to court.

The OP didn't state the size of the tree or how much is on which property. I suppose if the majority of the tree is on the OP's property, it might now be his responsibility to remove what is over the line.

The owner of the property where the tree grew might not get insurance coverage for a dead tree, but the OP might. I'd call my ins. co.

Where I live, trees falling are generally the recipients problem legally. An "Act of god".

If the neighbor dosn't have the ability to pay for the work, it would be smart to let the city handle it at that point. They will take the tree down and attach a lien on the property until the bill is paid.

You might try posting to misc.legal.moderated. Tell what state you are in. --H

As pointed out by others, tree law can vary significantly from area to area -- it might be the neighbors responsibility, it might be the OP's responsibility (at least for the part now over the property line), it might depend whether the tree was known dead or got knocked over in a storm, etc.

In any case, it should be removed ASAP -- talk to the neighbor first, pointing out the danger; that may be enough to get it taken care of. If not, find out the law in the area and contact whomever is needed to help with that (whether that's the local authorities, a tree trimmer, your insurance company, etc).

Josh

If hit by lightning or high wind, sure. In this case, however, the tree is an obvious, manifest hazard that is solely under the control of the neighbor. If it falls and kills a neighbor, a case can be made for manslaughter.

A leaning dead tree is no different in kind from a leaning, unsecured scaffold.

But, if the tree is now in the OP's yard, he may receive the bill.

Certainly, if the tree was dead, the neighbor may have more responsibility than if it had been a healthy tree. Dead trees are an obvious hazard.

State laws generally do not dwell on situations such as this. They instead rely on the common law handed down for the past eight centuries.

Drummed into my head over and over in law school was the mantra "Everything you need to know about contract law can be encompassed by the study of three things." These three things were: Pits, Fences, and one other that I forgot. I want to say it had something to do with mayonnaise, but I'm sure that's not right.

You never know. In-law in Cleveland got money from his insurance company for removal of branch on one of his trees threatening neighbor's garage.

if the tree was a known hazard its the property owners problem and liability falls on them, the one the dead tree stood on.

I would ask for help removing the tree, and if they refuse ask for their homeowners insurance company name......

the liabilty is the insurance company.

my live tree had a large limb fall on a neighbors car.

since the tree appered healthy before the storm my insurance company wasnt on the hook

"HeyBub" wrote in news:xMudnSi3C64ApGXUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

How do you know what they can see? Perhaps the neighbor doesn't know the tree is broken. They may not be able to see it from their vantage point.

Since the OP is on good terms, you need to talk to the neighbor and explain it's a danger.

In general, whatever is over your property, you can cut down.

Talk to the neighbor, first. Then come back here and let ppl know what the neighbor says.

Frank wrote:

Lordy. Way overthinking this. Around here, the property line rules- it hits your land, your problem. Call a tree service, get an estimate for your part and for his part. Show it to the neighbor, and along with asking for permission for the tree guys to go on his side of the line to work, ask if he wants them to clean up the part in his yard as well. Note that around here, 'reasonable access' must be given for situations like this, but knocking on the door and asking is still considered polite. Big factor on the price will be if they can get a bucket truck back there, or if they have to do it the hard way. Do you, your neighbor, or any nearby neighbors, want the tree for firewood, assuming it is suitable for that? Running through the chipper is usually an additional charge, since they have to drag it all to the road. If they can just cut into 2-foot lengths on the ground and leave, less work for them. Grinding the stump will probably be an extra c-note, if the neighbor wants that. Around here, insurance usually only covers if tree hits house or outbuilding, or house/outbuilding is at risk. I had a tree take out my shed, and my agent told me I'd be better off eating it (the $500 above the $500 deductible), because the NEXT claim would bump me into high-risk category. So I paid the tree guy out of pocket ($325), and I am (slowly) blacksmithing the shed myself, instead of buying a replacement.

I wouldn't even dream of involving lawyers in this. It is going to cost a couple of grand at most, and even if you win, who wants to live next to an enemy? Life is too damn short, etc.

-- aem sends....

m...

my opinion from experience...........

the property owner the tree grew on knew it was dead, and didnt have it removed.

as such he is responsible for all costs.......

It certainly isn't the law everywhere or I would suspect even most places in the US, where much of this is based on common law. Generally, just because a tree is on HIS property and falls onto YOUR property, doesn't mean he's responsible. If it was a tree that had no obvious problems and just fell one day, then in most cases the person who's property it was on is not responsible. Examples of this happening could be that it was brought down by a wind storm or had internal rot that was not apparent from the outside.

On the other hand, if it was obvious the tree was dead or had a problem and the property owner did nothing about it, then he probably is liable.

If you have a legal reference that says otherwise, let us have a look.

my opinion from experience...........

the property owner the tree grew on knew it was dead, and didnt have it removed.

as such he is responsible for all costs.......

=============

Let's all keep guessing. Meanwhile, I suspect the OP won't ever return to the discussion. He's lost in google land, trying to figure out how to find the thread he started.

m...

Well I had a similar problem and my neighbor paid to have the tree removed. I guess if you have money to burn, then yeah, go ahead and shell out the bucks before asking.