The plaintiffs own a vacation house in Randolph County. Ten feet from this house is a large pine tree, 28 inches in diameter. The tree sits on the boundary line between the plaintiffs’ property and the defendants’ property. In fact, 19 inches of the tree is on the plaintiffs’ side of the boundary line and 9 inches is on the defendants’ side of the boundary line.
The Randolph County Circuit Court ruled that the plaintiffs could remove the tree. The defendants appealed, and the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals found that the tree was owned by both landowners and that neither could remove the tree without the other’s permission. Young v. Ledford, 37 So.3d 832 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009). In a concurring opinion, two of the appeals court judges indicated that there was an exception to the rule about boundary-line trees when the tree is a nuisance.
When the case was remanded to the circuit court, the plaintiff asked for a new hearing to determine whether the tree was a nuisance and therefore removable. The circuit court agreed to this hearing, but the defendants once again appealed to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, asserting that the appellate court’s decision had decided the matter. The appeals court ruled that the circuit court could have another hearing on the case to determine whether the tree was a nuisance. See Young v. Ledford, decided on August 26, 2011.
Items on this web page are general in nature. They cannot—and should not—replace consultation with a competent legal professional. Nothing on this web page should be considered rendering legal advice.
Return to top.
Return to Legal Developments.
Attorneys who practice in the area
real estate law.
