Case ID: mich_260/html/0100-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Clark, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LENNON v. TERRALL.
    Adjoining Landowners — Trees on Boundary Common Property.
    Tree on boundary line of adjoining lots is common property of both owners, and .neither has right to cut, injure, or destroy it without consent of other.
    Appeal from Kent; Perkins (Willis B.), J.
    Submitted June 8, 1932.
    (Docket No. 56, Calendar No. 36,568.)
    Decided September 16, 1932.
    Bill by Grace Lennon against Charles P. Terrall to enjoin destruction of a tree on their common lot line. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
    Affirmed,
    
      Cornelius Hoffius, for plaintiff.
    
      Fred C. Temple, for defendant.
   Clark, C. J.

The parties are adjoining lot owners. A large tree stands on the line dividing the lots. Defendant began to take it down. After he had taken off some limbs he was restrained at the suit of plaintiff, who prayed permanent injunction and damages. Plaintiff had decree. Defendant has appealed.

Every question presented by appellant assumes the body or trunk of the tree to be on his land, and his case is briefed on that assumption. The record is wholly to the effect that the trunk of the tree is on the line, so the questions call for no discussion.

This tree is the common property of both parties and neither has the right to cut, injure, or destroy it without consent of the other. 1 C. J. p. 1233.

Decree affirmed. Costs to appellee.

McDonald, Potter, Sharpe, North, Fead, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred. 
      
       to property rights in trees on or overhanging boundary line, see annotation in 21 L. R. A. 729; 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 3.
      On rights and remedies in case of encroachment of trees, shrubbery or other vegetation across boundary line, see annotation in 76 A. L. R. 1111.