[WSBARP] injunction dangerous trees

[Eric Nelsen]

I've never had to take it all the way to trial either, but the argument I have made is that a nuisance action can be based on a reasonable apprehension of injury/damage, and injunction is an available remedy for nuisance. Lead case is the one on expansion of the reservoir in Volunteer Park in Seattle--Ferry v. City of Seattle, 116 Wn. 648, 203 P. 40 (1922), which is a re-hearing and reversal of the prior opinion at 200 P. 336 (1921).  See also Kitsap County v. Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club, 184 Wn.App. 252, 337 P.3d 328 (2014); note there is an unpublished follow-on to the Kitsap case, No. 48781-1-II (Wash.App. Div. 2 November 21, 2017).

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen
SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
1417 31st Ave South
Seattle WA  98144-3909
phone 206-625-0092
fax 206-625-9040

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wilson-Hoss
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 1:02 PM
To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv'
Subject: [WSBARP] injunction dangerous trees

This has come up before on the list serve, and at that time I don't think there was any final conclusion. Neighbor has several large dead firs, residential neighborhood. He refuses to take them down. We will get an arborist, or maybe just a tree service because these are really obviously dangerous, to give us a statement and we will offer to pay to take them down. If they fall, they are on a slope and aimed at clients' house. Mature fir trees are really, really heavy, even when dead.

If he doesn't agree (perhaps some issues with thinking clearly...) then I will want to get an injunction requiring him to take them down. General nuisance theory, interference with enjoyment of property. Beats waiting for them to drop on my clients' heads. Judges here typically apply a little common sense to things. But any time I have gotten close to this before, things have settled, and I haven't had to actually file the lawsuit. My recollection is that I never really found a great theory to use for the injunction based on clear precedence. Anyone know of anything I am missing, please?

Thanks.

Rob

Robert D. Wilson-Hoss
Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP
236 West Birch Street
Shelton, WA 98584
360 426-2999
www.hossandwilson-hoss.com<www.hossandwilsonhoss.com>
rob at hctc.com<mailto:rob at hctc.com>

This message is intended solely for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or by telephone (call us collect at the number listed above) and immediately delete this message and any and all of its attachments.  Thank you.

This office does debt collection and this e-mail may be an attempt to collect a debt, Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.  To the extent the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692) applies this firm is acting as a debt collector for the condominium/homeowners' association named above to collect a debt owed to it. Any information obtained will be used for collection purposes. You have the right to seek advice of legal counsel.


________________________________
[AVG logo]<https://www.avg.com/internet-security>


This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com<https://www.avg.com/internet-security>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190926/f330935e/attachment.html>