[WSBARP] Boundary Line/Timber Trespass Issues

[samuel at meylerlegal.com]

Listmates:

 

PC has a boundary line/timber trespass dispute with the neighbor.  Neighbor
purchased their property in 2012, which was a vacant lot at the time.  Two
large (think 60-75 feet) trees straddled the boundary line.  Property owners
have an interest in trees on a common boundary that is "proportionate to the
percentage of [the trees'] trunks growing on [the owner's] property." Happy
Bunch, LLC v. Grandview N., LLC, 142 Wn. App. 81, 93, 173 P.3d 959 (2007).
"[T]he correct measure of damages is calculated by multiplying the trees'
value by the percentage of the trees' trunks that had been growing on the
plaintiff's property."  Id. at 94.

 

Neighbor built a residence on the property in 2017.  During their
construction of the residence in 2017, they completely removed one of the
trees without consent and removed roots from the second tree that were on
the neighbor's side of the boundary in order to be able to excavate, pour
their foundation, run utilities, etc.  We know all of this from the personal
representative of the estate that PC purchased the property from.  PC's
predecessor (deceased) did nothing about the timber trespass at that time.

 

PC purchased their property from the estate in 2018.  The one tree that was
left standing by the other neighbor was dying.  Arborist says that the
damage/cutting of the roots that the neighbor had done caused significant
damage and the tree was dying (not dead, but dying).  The tree was extremely
close the PC's residence and PC was concerned about damage to their
residence, so they wrote to neighbor at their permanent residence (neighbor
developed the next-door property as a second home) and said that they want
to remove the tree.  Neighbor never responded so PC went out and took the
tree down.  You know where this is going.  Neighbor came to their vacation
home, found that PC took the tree down and is asserting claims.    

 

RCW 64.12.040 provides mitigating circumstances, but legitimate and imminent
harm to one's own property does not appear to be a defense or a mitigating
factor when someone takes down a tree that they "jointly own" because it is
straddling the boundary.  Neighbor's complete removal of one tree and damage
to the roots of the tree that PC ultimately removed took place when PC's
predecessor owned the property/trees and it was several years ago so I don't
think that PC has any sort of viable counterclaim.  

 

It seems wrong that the neighbor took down a co-owned tree without
liability, caused the other tree to start dying, but PC is liable to the
neighbor for protecting their home from the tree falling on it.  Anyone have
any thoughts as to potential claims, counterclaims or defenses?

 

Happy Friday!

 

Sam  

 

 

Samuel M. Meyler

Meyler Legal, PLLC 

1700 Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200

Seattle, Washington 98109

Tel:  206.876.7770

Fax:  206.876.7771

Email:   <mailto:samuel at meylerlegal.com> samuel at meylerlegal.com

  

NOTICE:

 

This electronic message contains information which may be Confidential or
Privileged and constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information is
intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If you
are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is
prohibited.  If you received this transmission in error, please notify the
sender and delete the copy you received together with any attachments.
Thank you.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220923/ec73902a/attachment.html>