« Ind. Law - No unlicensed golf carts on Wabash County highways, streets or alleys | Main | Ind. Courts - Federal Judge Hamilton hears arguments on I-69 route »
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Law - "Who pays if your neighbor's tree damages your house? Va. High Court Breaks New Ground on Tree Liability"
Brigid Schulte of the Washington Post reports today in a lengthy story that begins:
In the suburbs, there are few issues that can cause as much rancor and neighborhood discord as a deep-rooted, mature tree that has no regard for the neat boundaries of a property line.The decision is Fancher v. Fagella (09/14/2007).Who pays if your neighbor's tree damages your house?
Yesterday, the Virginia Supreme Court weighed in on the contentious issue with a decision that overturns a nearly 70-year-old precedent. Now, for the first time, homeowners can sue to force a neighbor to cut back branches or roots or take out the tree altogether if it poses a risk of "actual harm" or an "imminent danger" to their houses, the court ruled. Tree owners can now be held liable for any damage caused by the tree.
The reasoning? The court realized just how much Virginia has changed.
The justices ruled in a Fairfax County case that the old law made perfect sense in a rural world, but now, with townhouse and condo developments springing up on former farmland, with infill development in cities and densely packed neighborhoods, the law "is unsuited to modern urban and suburban life."
Virginia is the latest state to make such a change. And in other states, it has resulted, at least initially, in far more than heated over-the-back-fence negotiations.
"This is the trend around the country, as we go from having arbitrary distinctions that made more sense in a rural economy," said Steven J. Eagle, a law professor and property rights expert at George Mason University law school. "This is a better line of reasoning. The problem is, it probably will result in more litigation.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 15, 2007 12:13 PM
Posted to General Law Related