Zeiss

The plaintiff commenced an action to recover damages; she was awarded a judgment in the trial court, and the defendants have appealed. The facts are briefly stated in the findings as follows:

[1] There being nothing in the record to the contrary, it will be presumed that the plaintiff’s title extended to the center of Aberdeen Way. (Civ. Code, sec. 831.) Trees whose trunks stand wholly upon the land of one owner belong exclusively to him. (Civ. Code, sec. 833.) [2] In the case of Donahue v. Keystone Gas Co., 181 N. Y. 313 [ 106 Am. St. Rep. 549 , 70 L. R. A. 761, 73 N. E. 1108 ], the supreme court of New York had under consideration a set of facts quite similar. Following some earlier eases in that state, the court held that the plaintiff had a property right sufficient to permit him to maintain an action against any person, except the highway officials, who might wrongfully injure or destroy the trees. (See, also, 3 Dillon on Municipal Corporations, 5th ed., sec. 1126.) The defendants claimed that the trees leaned over the property of the defendant Zeiss and were a menace to his property. The trial court found against him on that contention. Even though the trial court had found…