Opinion ID: 2326804
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Structure in the Nature of a Fence

Text: [¶ 13] We review legal questions of statutory interpretation de novo. Jusseaume v. Ducatt, 2011 ME 43, ¶ 16, 15 A.3d 714. A statute will be interpreted according to its plain meaning to discern the intent of the Legislature. Id. If a statute is reasonably susceptible to different interpretations, it is ambiguous, see Gaeth v. Deacon, 2009 ME 9, ¶ 15, 964 A.2d 621, and only then may we review additional indicia of legislative intent to determine its meaning, HL 1, LLC v. Riverwalk, LLC, 2011 ME 29, ¶ 17, 15 A.3d 725. [¶ 14] The plain language of section 2801 anticipates the possibility that a structure in the nature of a fence could constitute a spite fence. 17 M.R.S. § 2801. We therefore discern no error in the court's conclusion that the dense planting of tall trees adjacent to the neighboring property to form a continuous barrier between the two properties created a structure in the nature of a fence. Id.; see Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged 837 (2002) (defining a fence as a barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion or to mark a boundary). Although the plantings did not exactly trace the boundary line described by the two deeds, nothing in the statute requires that the boundary created by the fence run directly alongside the deed-defined boundary line.