Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

BlueWaveNeverEnd

(14,007 posts)
Sun Mar 15, 2026, 09:52 PM Sunday

Largest tree cutting verdict. Homeowner returned from vacation to find 9 mature trees cut down via neighbors instruction [View all]

https://www.reddit.com/r/treelaw/comments/1ruqanb/jury_awards_largest_tree_cutting_verdict_in/


The plaintiff went to San Diego for a work trip for a few days in February 2024. While she was gone, a neighbor had Unlimbited Tree Service perform work on his property. He left a note in the plaintiff’s mailbox saying he intended to cut the trees down. He and the company made no other efforts to reach her, and she didn’t see the note until she returned and the trees were already cut down.

Many of the trees were mature, at over 30 inches in diameter. The money is enough to plant mature trees rather than saplings, a process that costs nearly $90,000 per tree, Skipper said.

“It boggles my mind that a licensed company would take such action without ever speaking with or receiving written permission from the property owner, my client,” Skipper wrote in a cease-and-desist letter to the neighbor and the company, calling their conduct “outrageous.”
“Any basic due diligence would have led Unlimbited to the conclusion that it needed to obtain my client’s consent.”

The plaintiff sued Unlimbited and her neighbor in January 2025 in Prince George’s County Circuit Court. Shortly before trial, the neighbor settled his claims and exited the lawsuit, with an insurance company paying $500,000, Skipper said. The company moved to reduce the verdict by that amount, to $433,000, and she consented. Because the tort was committed by two parties — the owner and the company — the jury had to decide the total damages suffered by the plaintiff, not the exact harm caused by the defendant, he said.

Chuck Preslipsky, the owner of Unlimbited, said that when his company contracted with the plaintiff’s neighbor, they believed the trees were his and that the two neighbors both wanted them removed.
22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Glad the idiots got charged. Disaffected Sunday #1
it takes a big machine. mopinko Sunday #6
I saw this picture just a few hours ago. Collimator Sunday #13
yeah, that's what i saw. mopinko Yesterday #15
Wow, that is impressive. Disaffected Yesterday #17
Despite the Japanese affection for technology. . . Collimator Yesterday #18
I've Seen It Done On A Municipal Golf Course.... ProfessorGAC Yesterday #21
Now do the White House. NT mahatmakanejeeves Sunday #2
Very common crime pfitz59 Sunday #3
"... and I am SOOOOO privileged !" nt eppur_se_muova Sunday #4
Many years ago a stand of black walnut trees moniss Sunday #5
Someone watching and waiting BlueWaveNeverEnd Sunday #7
WTF dalton99a Sunday #8
That hurts. calimary Sunday #9
Kind of hard to insist it was on the contracting person's property if intheflow Yesterday #20
The penalty is to bring pain to the defendants IbogaProject Sunday #10
My guess is it has to do with autumn leaf pileup. intheflow Yesterday #19
Likely A Good Bet ProfessorGAC Yesterday #22
Ooh that is a Levittown IbogaProject Sunday #11
Those trees might have been planted when the town was developed BlueWaveNeverEnd Yesterday #14
Early 1960s IbogaProject Yesterday #16
Birds depend on trees for habitat and migration. littlemissmartypants Sunday #12
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Largest tree cutting verd...