That one lawyer is not the only one I've heard this from. Also, I found
this:
http://public.findlaw.com/real_estat...4F351504F.html
I should point out that it would be absolutely impossible for that neighbor
to trim the branches of the tree that are above his side of the property
without killing the tree, since as far as the branches go, there's as much
on his side as on our side.

btw, I'm not sure what you linked me to was an actual law, but it definately
over-simplifies what are much more complicated circumstances in my case. The
"law" is not fair at all if it allows them to kill a tree because it's
partially on their property.

Anyway, the legal proceedings have begun; I'll keep everyone posted.




"Chet Hayes" wrote in message
m...
Here's a link to a newspaper article that supports what I said
earlier, which is that usually a property owner can trim trees
overhanging into his yard. If the law were otherwise, the courts
would be full of cases where judges would have to decide which trees
could be trimmed and which ones couldn't. The law keeps things simple
and is fair. I think you'll find your lawyer doesn't know what he's
talking about, it sure wouldn't be the first time. But keep us
posted....


"http://www.startribune.com/stories/397/3871811.html




"TheKeith" wrote in message
...
everybody brought up some interesting points--I appreciate everyone's
help.
Let me update you on what has happened so far today and what we've found
out. I found a list of certified arborists on the International Society
of
Arboriculture website and we had one of the guys come over. He basically
contradicted everything the first "tree surgeon" said, and said that the
damage already done is irreparable and that the tree is likely to die
within
5 years--that major "scaffolding roots" had been cut and those are
vital.
The guy is making a report for us and my father already contacted an
attorney, which is not a big deal since the uft (teacher's union) pays
all
personal attorney fees as part of my father's retirement plan. The
attorney
said that they have absolutely no right to cut the tree even if it
encroaches on their property--it's still our property and they are
liable
for damages. He said that there was precedent for such circumstances and
that they are in our favor. Additionally, my father contacted the
insurance
company who said they would reimburse us for any costs or damages, but
that
they would then sue the neighbors themselves.

Well, I'm happy the neighbors will get their just-deserts (hopefully)
but
I'm sorry it's all coming at the expense of a beautiful 30-yr old silver
maple. The last fence that was put up actually went more on my neighbors
side (old neighbor--now deceased) in order to accomodate the tree. I'll
never figure out assholes like this, who come in and destroy the
integrity
of the property in order to make way for stupid fences. These very same
people tore down a nice mature evergreen on their side (planted by the
very
same deceased neighbor) to make room for their ac units. It's not like
we
live on a beach where trees can hurt a million dollar view--we live in
brooklyn!!! "Dr. Rev. Chuck, M.D., P.A.", in his reply, made a comment
about
the tree making their ac units more efficient--in our case this is true.
If
and when our tree comes down, the neighbor's ac's will be less efficient
(I
hope a lot less)--since our maple shades the entire section of their
property with the condensors.

As soon as I get a hold of whatever law or precedent is in our favor,
I'll
post it to my website and link you to it.

thanks again




"TheKeith" wrote in message
...
I live in Brooklyn, NY and in the backyard is a 30-yr old maple tree
that
my
parents planted before I was even born. The tree was planted about 2
feet
away from the fence and now, 30 yrs later, is a bit of a monster--part
of
the trunk is on my neighbors side. They are currently putting up a big
fence
and have already managed to convince my parents to let them cut a
chunk
away
from the very bottom of the trunk (my parents consulted a tree surgeon
first
of course, and he said it was ok)--now the neighbors are saying that
they
need to cut what appears to be a major root (almost looks like part of
the
trunk itself)--the tree surgeon is coming over again tomorrow, but I'm
fairly certain that this is a vital component to the survival of the
tree.
My grandfather was a real estate attorney and some years before he
died
looked up some law regarding trees and discovered something called
"air
rights" or something like that, which basically provided that the
branches
of a tree, as long as it doesn't physically touch a neighbors property
may
not be cut by that neighbor even if it is "over" their property. I was
wondering if there are any comparable laws regarding the tree trunk
itself
and its major roots, which obviously run well under my neighbors
property?
Help would be greatly appreciated -- thanks.

Keith
kegepet
at
nyc dot
rr dot
com