Nuisance Trees: The Massachusetts or Hawaii Rule?

Homeowners whose property is affected by nuisance trees may struggle to find legal representation due to liability issues and court outcomes being uncertain. The Massachusetts rule and the Hawaii rule offer different remedies for nuisance tree issues, and the Hawaii rule is considered a better fit for Florida. The Massachusetts rule allows for self-help as the only remedy, while the Hawaii rule provides for legal action against the tree owner. The concern for increased litigation under the Hawaii rule has not been proven. In Florida, if a healthy tree on your property is causing damage to your neighbor’s property, they are allowed to trim the branches or roots at their own expense. However, in historic neighborhoods with old, large houses and trees, the situation can get more complicated. The Massachusetts rule, which is followed in Florida, doesn’t address all the issues that can come up in these cases. So, if there’s a problem, it may need to be resolved in a different way. This can lead to lawsuits and other problems. It’s not always clear who is responsible for what in these situations. Neighbors in Massachusetts and Tennessee have been disagreeing about tree roots and branches causing damage to their properties. In some cases, courts have ruled that the neighbor who cut the tree roots did not have to pay for damages, while in other cases, the neighbor who cut the branches had to pay for the damage caused. In one case in Florida, a court ruled that a neighbor’s tree roots damaged another neighbor’s sewer line, but the court denied the neighbor’s request for help. However, in an appeal in Tennessee, the court ruled that the tree was a nuisance and the neighbor had to pay for the damage caused. In simple terms, the Massachusetts rule says that if a tree or plant from someone’s property causes harm to your property, the owner of the tree or plant may be held responsible. However, this rule doesn’t really make sense when compared to the laws in Florida. In Florida, landowners are responsible for preventing harm to others outside their property, and they have a duty to take care of their land. This means that in Florida, the responsibility for harm caused by trees or plants is determined on a case-by-case basis, rather than following a strict rule like in Massachusetts. Before a 2018 court case, Florida landowners were held responsible for dangerous conditions on their property that posed a risk to others. The case allowed a person to sue the City of North Bay Village for allowing plants to block visibility at an intersection. This case challenged the “Massachusetts rule” which limits a property owner’s liability for trees causing harm. Critics argue that this rule is outdated and unfair, and that injured parties should be able to seek compensation. The “Hawaii rule” says that trees and plants are usually not a problem, but they can be if they cause harm to nearby property. If a tree is causing harm, the owner may have to pay for the damage and fix the problem. This rule strikes a balance between letting people have trees on their property and making sure they don’t harm their neighbors. In Florida, this rule might become more common because it helps solve tree problems without going to court. In Florida, the Massachusetts rule doesn’t protect property owners from being responsible for nuisance activities on their land. The law makes it clear that the intent or motive behind the nuisance doesn’t need to be proven, making it difficult for property owners to use the Massachusetts rule as a defense. A “spite fence” is a fence or structure built to annoy a neighbor, and it can include trees. Florida courts recognize spite fences, and they can lead to nuisance tree cases. However, these cases are often expensive and may not reach the appeal process. In 1913, California passed a law that said it’s illegal to build a fence over 10 feet tall just to annoy your neighbor. This law is based on the idea of private nuisance, which means something that bothers someone on their own property. The law allows people to take legal action if their neighbor’s fence is causing them problems. This is similar to other cases where courts have ruled that things like bad smells or loud noises from a neighbor’s property can also be considered private nuisances. The private nuisance doctrine is used to balance the conflicting rights of landowners. A row of trees can be considered a fence, and in some cases, a spite fence. This means that if a row of trees or hedges is considered to be blocking a neighbor’s enjoyment of their property, it may be considered a nuisance. In Florida, a case called Larkin v. Tsavaris established that spite fence cases are still commonly brought to court. In that case, the defendant was found to be in violation of zoning ordinances and was ordered to remove the structures causing the nuisance. In Larkin, the court said that a person who builds a tall fence just to annoy their neighbor can be ordered to lower it. This could also apply to trees or hedges. In Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five, Inc., a hotel tried to stop another hotel from building an addition because it would block their light and air. The court said no. In some cases, neighbors may plant trees or build fences to block their neighbor’s view. Courts can order them to take down the trees or fences if they’re found to be done out of spite. In Florida, this can be a problem, as the state doesn’t have a specific law for this. Most of the time, these cases are settled out of court, but sometimes they can be contentious. The court looks at whether the trees serve a real purpose, how they affect the neighbor, and whether they were put there to be mean. If they were, the court can make the neighbor take them down. According to F.S. §386.01, it is illegal to do anything that could threaten someone’s health or cause disease. This could include keeping or growing trees that might attract pests or spread disease to your neighbors. Even if a municipality gives you permission, it’s still not allowed under this law. If someone’s trees are causing a problem, they can sue their neighbor under this law. Yes, an individual can sue under or cite F.S. §386.01 and F.S. §386.051 for negligence and maintaining a nuisance that is harmful to human or animal life. If someone is found guilty of creating a nuisance injurious to health, they can be punished with a misdemeanor. If a party can show that a statute was violated, it can make it easier to prove negligence. The presence of iguanas climbing trees and leaving feces on roofs can be a serious health hazard. Florida law prohibits anything that could threaten someone’s health or cause disease, and the Department of Health can investigate and take action to remove any health hazards. If a town allows trees that attract disease-carrying iguanas, they could be breaking the law and may be held liable for any harm caused. If you’re affected by this, you can ask state or county agencies for help, including the Department of Health. If the Department of Health finds a nuisance on someone’s property, they have to remove it within 24 hours. If they don’t, the department or local health authorities can remove it and make the property owner pay for the cost. If the owner doesn’t pay, they can be taken to court. If a landowner’s trees are causing problems for their neighbors, they can be held responsible for the harm it causes. The neighbors can take them to court and ask for the trees to be trimmed or removed, and they may also get some money for the trouble the trees caused. If someone’s hedge trees are causing a health threat or annoyance to their neighbor, the neighbor could sue for damages. They could ask for money to make up for the decreased value of their property and for any harm to their health. The neighbor could also request extra money as a punishment. Even if the tree owner was following the law, they might still have to pay. If the neighbor’s health was seriously affected by the tree’s feces, they could ask for a lot of money. Emotional distress could also be considered in the case. In Florida, even if someone is only awarded a small amount of money as a result of a lawsuit (called nominal damages), they can still be awarded extra money as punishment to the person who did something wrong (called punitive damages). The Florida courts have said that the jury can give punitive damages even if the person who sued didn’t prove they were owed any other money. The most they can get in punitive damages is $500,000, but in really bad cases, they could get up to $2 million. If a landscaper or planner is aware of hazards and someone gets hurt by a falling tree, they could be ordered to pay a lot of money in punitive damages, which is meant to punish them. In Florida, if someone is found to have intentionally harmed someone or been really careless, they can be ordered to pay punitive damages. It’s easier to prove someone was really careless than to prove they intentionally did something wrong. Tree owners should also know that their insurance might not cover punitive damages. This should serve as a reminder to tree owners to be good neighbors and take care of their trees. These are court cases about property disputes and nuisances. They involve things like fences, water drainage, and animals causing problems for neighbors. Some cases involve arguments about the legal responsibility of property owners for these issues. This article includes information from legal professionals who work in different areas of law. They have provided their expertise on a specific legal issue in Florida. The information is provided by the Solo and Small Firm Section, which is a group within The Florida Bar.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/nuisance-trees-the-massachusetts-or-hawaii-rule/