[WSBARP] Disclosure of Survey Results

[Michael Brinell]

Yes timber trespass is apparent. It seems a duty to obtain consent to remove implies a duty to disclose shared ownership interest prior to removal.

Would anyone mind sharing a complaint for timber trespass if it's not too much trouble? Thank you for the insights.

Michael T. Brinell

Attorney at Law

PO Box 32364

Seattle, WA 98273

Tel. 360.986.6534

CONFIDENTIALITY

The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of the person or entity to whom it is addressed. This email may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the person whose name appears above, or the person responsible for delivering the email to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, using, copying, distributing or disseminating this communication is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please email the sender atmbrinell at protonmail.comThank you.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, June 22, 2020 1:08 PM, Roger Hawkes <Roger at law-hawks.com> wrote:

> Sounds pretty clearly like timber trespass; lots of statutory and case law words about that; end result should be treble damages and attorney fees.
>
> Roger Hawkes, WSBA # 5173
>
> Shoreline Office: 19944 Ballinger Way NE
>
> Shoreine, WA 98155
>
> Sultan Office: 423 Main
>
> Sultan, WA 98294
>
> Phone: 206 367 5000; fax: 206 367 4005
>
> Email: roger at law-hawks.com
>
> Web site: www.hawkeslawfirm
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Michael Brinell
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 11:54 AM
> To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
> Subject: [WSBARP] Disclosure of Survey Results
>
> Listmates,
>
> Clients own several properties in a row and a developer of the adjacent property has removed several trees from them without their consent. Developer has provided surveys that showed they knew the trees were not on their property prior to their removal.
>
> Did the developers have a duty to disclose the fact clients owned the trees prior to their removal? Has anyone dealt with something similar? I'd appreciate any insights, thanks.
>
> Michael
>
> Michael T. Brinell
>
> Attorney at Law
>
> PO Box 32364
>
> Seattle, WA 98273
>
> Tel. 360.986.6534
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY
>
> The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of the person or entity to whom it is addressed. This email may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the person whose name appears above, or the person responsible for delivering the email to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, using, copying, distributing or disseminating this communication is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please email the sender at mbrinell at protonmail.com Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20200622/0ae42522/attachment.html>