Tree Knocked Down

Ohio

I live in a commercially zoned area. I had a tree in the corner of my property - nest to a piece of property that was being developed. While the store was being built, the excavating company dug in to the roots (on their property) with a bulldozer and it caused the tree to fall.

Do I have any rights?

Yes, you can sue for the (here's the interesting part) difference in value of your real estate before and after the damage. From a couple of different cases (about the same case that is not available for free)

In Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Merryweather (1928), 6 Ohio Law Abs., 528, the plaintiff brought an action for damages for injury to a tree, and the court held the measure of damages to be the difference in value of the real estate before and after 428*428 the injury, and that the admission of testimony of an expert as to the cost of replacing the tree constituted reversible error.

Click to expand...

*47 In Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Merryweather (Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County), 6 Ohio Law Abs. 528, it was conceded in argument that the injury to the tree (a wrongful trimming), without reference to the property on which it stood, was not the proper measure of damages. Furthermore that case contained no reference as to any necessity of replacement.

Click to expand...

Thanks Tranquility

I have been trying to work through the excavator's insurance company. I received a letter today citing Murray v Heabron, 35 Ohio Op. 135 stating that "the overhanging or protruding branches or roots of trees may be cut or looped off by the person upon whose property they over-hang or protrude." While I do not disagree with that statement, I didn't think they would be able to permanently damage the tree.

To that end, I guess I wonder how to know what law trumps what - because it seems like conflicting rulings.

It appears you will need an attorney and an appraisal of the property value before and after the tree. You could of course go to small claims court.

Ohio Revised Code
901.51 Injuring vines, bushes, trees, or crops on land of another.

No person, without privilege to do so, shall recklessly cut down, destroy, girdle, or otherwise injure a vine, bush, shrub, sapling, tree, or crop standing or growing on the land of another or upon public land.

In addition to the penalty provided in section 901.99 of the Revised Code, whoever violates this section is liable in treble damages for the injury caused.

Effective Date: 01-01-1974

Click to expand...

I would say that while the landowner has the common law right to trim the tree to the property line, they must do so reasonably and not injure the tree on your property.

tranquility said:

I would say that while the landowner has the common law right to trim the tree to the property line, they must do so reasonably and not injure the tree on your property.

Click to expand...

So, the owner of the neighboring property should have sued OP for trespass since their tree was encroaching on the neighboring property. That way the OP could have paid to do whatever they wanted to do with the tree as long as the roots did not encroach on the neighboring property or paid the neighboring property for the loss of value to their property. Would that be better solution?

The common law solution has usually been to trim the tree reasonably and charge the person responsible for the damages if self help was chosen or sue in nuisance or negligence if the roots/branches become a problem. (Trespassing is a little bit of a problem due to the intent required.) While the case law is surprisingly sparse, I would bet the court would find bulldozing the roots of a tree is not reasonable.

Hire an attorney and sue them in small claim courts for depreciating the value of your house by cutting down the tree. The common law states that trim of the tree can only be done rather than moving them from roots.