Falling Trees and
Tree Failure Liability Cases in Georgia
Craig Hardegree, Esq.
Spring storms and high winds
often contribute to the downing of trees which can raise
significant legal issues. Trees often fall across
property lines damaging a neighbor’s property or even the
neighbor personally. There have been many cases where
death has occurred when a tree fell on a passing vehicle.
Whether the owner of a tree is liable for any such damage
depends solely on whether the landowner had prior notice
that a particular tree constituted a danger. The amount
and severity of the damages caused by a falling tree are
completely irrelevant in determining whether the landowner
is liable in the first place. Also, the fact that a tree
may be determined, after the fact, to have been in an
advanced state of decay, does not impose liability on the
landowner. The landowner is only responsible if it can be
shown that he had notice of a potential problem before the
tree fell.
This begs the question,
“Wouldn’t a landowner have a duty to inspect trees on his
property to determine if any of the trees did constitute a
danger?” Unfortunately or fortunately (depending on
whether you are the person the tree fell on or whether you
are the person who owned the tree) Georgia law does not
impose a general duty on a landowner to inspect trees for
potential problems. The rule which is often stated in
such cases is that “there is no duty to consistently and
constantly check all trees for non-visible rot.”
Prior knowledge of a
potentially hazardous tree may be shown in the form of
either “actual knowledge” or “constructive knowledge”.
The landowner has actual knowledge of a potential risk
where it can be shown that someone reported to him before
the tree fell that a problem existed, or in the rare case
where a landowner might admit, after a tree falls, that he
knew the tree was in trouble but just did nothing about
it. Since neither case is likely, a person damaged by
another person’s tree will usually have to show that the
landowner had “constructive knowledge” of a problem,
meaning that because of existing conditions, he should
have known of a problem, even if he actually didn’t. The
rule developed by the courts for proving constructive
knowledge on the part of the landowner is that it must be
shown that there was an “outward manifestation of decay
which was visible, apparent, and patent so that one might
be aware that high winds might combine with visible rot
and cause damage.”
If you are a property owner
and you notice things like a rotted cavity in a tree,
mushrooms growing on a tree, a girdling root or other
malformation, you may be well served to consult an
arborist to determine whether a tree constitutes a hazard,
especially if it is in close proximity to high value
targets. An arborist can also advise on the best way to
eliminate a risk.
If you are concerned about the potential
danger from a neighbor’s tree, you can also protect your
interests. Obviously you can’t force a neighbor to remove
a tree from his own property, but you can place a neighbor
on notice of a potential problem. The best way to do this
is to have a certified arborist look at the tree (from
your side of the fence, of course) and issue a report to
you detailing the outward signs of potential tree
failure. You can then send this report to your neighbor
by certified mail. When the tree does eventually fall and
damage your property, the neighbor won’t be able to use
the defense that he didn’t have prior knowledge of a
potential problem.
If you have been
involved in a car wreck, auto accident, truck collision, motor
vehicle crash or any other personal injury case and you live in
the cities of
Carrollton, Bremen, Bowdon, Villa Rica, Temple, Hiram, Dallas,
Douglasville or in Carroll County or Douglas County or in the
Counties of
Haralson, Paulding or Clayton, please
contact
our Douglasville Personal Injury Law Center for a free consultation
with a personal injury lawyer.
|
