ANOTHER PINE TREE CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 181, 31 July 1915, Page 8

ANOTHER PINE TREE CASE.

FATSMER GET? DAMAGES. enscs lmvp como i>rforp Mr. C (.'. Kettle, S.M.. at the Magistrate's <nurt of late, owing tr, the damages alleged to have resulted from growing pine trees on boundaries of properties. This morning the <'ourt was occupied with n cusp from YVatcrvieiv. Avon- ■ dale. The plaintiff Wius Charles Asbury I (Mr. Gregory!, and the defendants were Jjttvinia and V. Wilson (Mr. Bagna.ll). The claim was to recover £10 8/ damages made up ns follows: £4 8/ by reason of encroachment of the roots of pine trees, £a for loss occasioned by limbs overhanging plaintiff's property, and dropping pine necdlee on his ground, and £10 for damage to crops and fruit trees, and fence. The evidence showed that there ha<l been 17 pine trees, from t>o to 70 feet in height. An amount of evidence was aJso given regarding the damage done to crops, fruit trees, and fence. Mr. Bagnnl] submitted that the first item of the claim, re damages from roots had already been ruled out in a judgment given by Mr. Justice Chapman, to the efl'eci that such did not constitute a cause for action. In giving judgment. Mr. Kettle said it was a pity these people had not met together in a neighbourly manner instead of going to all tbe expense of taking the C.A.-.0 to Court. With regard to the roots of the pines, his "Worship said he wis not prepared to allow damages in this caee. although lie thought in other instances where it could be shown special damage was done to drains In- Toot*, an application would lie- On the other counts he thought .plaintiff was entitled lo succeed, and would give judgment for JOS with costs.