Scarborough

Scarborough v. Woodill

Good Law
1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 54·7 Cal. App. 39·93 P. 383
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 1907Civ. No. 386.California1,378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Taggart, J.

Appeal from judgment and order denying motion for a new trial.

Plaintiff and defendant own adjoining orange orchards in the county of Riverside, which are separated by a row of cypress trees growing on the boundary line between them. The trees vary in diameter from thirteen to twenty-three inches, and in height from seventy to seventy-five feet, and the trunks thereof stand partly on one side and partly on the other side of said line.

Defendant cut down eight of these trees (every alternate two), and threatened to continue to cut every alternate two trees until he had cut one-half of the entire row. The eight were taken to defendant’s home and used for firewood.

The trial court rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff for $100 damages and perpetually enjoining defendant from cutting down, injuring or destroying any of the remaining .trees growing on said line.

Line trees are “trees whose trunks stand partly on the land of two or more coterminous owners,” and “belong to them in common.” (Civ. Code, sec. 834 ; 28 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 2d ed., p. 538.)

While at common law there appears to have existed two views as to the character of the estate created in the adjacent owners…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.