$100,000 to replace a $28,000 tree they didn't own but sold for $2,000 ???

[Diggin It]

Confusing property rights story.

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2022/01/duo-charged-in-theft-of-28000-black-walnut-tree-one-of-states-largest-from-metroparks-in-strongsville.html

Valued at $28,000, they 'sold' a 55" Black Walnut they thought was theirs for $2,000 to a timber cutter who sold it for $10,000, but the parks office who says they owned it says it will cost $100,000 to replace. Later in the article it says they didn't get any money from the 'sale'. Also says timber company was cleared because of a contract that says a survey was done, but they apparently never asked to see the survey.

Couple claims it's all about the parks office wanting their land.

 

[Streetcar]

more of a survey story than property dispute
According to story ,tree was 6 ft off property line.
Value of tree to park is higher than its lumber value. Timber company kept part of tree
Total damage is lumber tree and surrounding trees

 

[riptides]

It's a tree dispute on top of the survey. All branches extending over the property line and what not.

 

[RjCorazza]

As far as the $100,000 claim, they can throw out any number they want. I suspect in court the value will be lumber value.
The bottom line is don't take things that are not yours. "We thought", "My father believed", etc don't mean anything.

 

[2LaneCruzer]

As Willie Nelson says, "That 'stuff' ain't right".

Are your walnut trees veneer or timber quality?

Farmstead Forest: High-value veneer-quality walnut trees are coveted, but farmers need to know the difference to understand what they have growing in their groves.

www.farmprogress.com

 

[PuffyC]

Not sure how they claim it would cost $100,000 to replace since you can't just go out and buy a growing, planted, 100+ year old black walnut tree that's 5.5 feet in diameter (!). IMO it's essentially priceless because it cannot be replaced as it was before it was cut down.

Regardless, this is just a story about people who wrongly assumed something was theirs when it wasn't and then lied when they sold it, and now can't figure out why they're in trouble. Being lazy and having a low IQ does not absolve you of a crime.

 

[Jstpssng]

Valie doesn’t really matter if it’s not your tree.
It sounds to me like the guy was up against the wall and tried to make a little extra money.
Now he’s in even worse shape.

 

[riptides]

I am going to have to run out to the back forty and start measuring. I could be retired again. LOL.

 

[TheMan419]

As far as the $100,000 claim, they can throw out any number they want. I suspect in court the value will be lumber value.
The bottom line is don't take things that are not yours. "We thought", "My father believed", etc don't mean anything.

No the lumber value is not the end all be all value. The tree had value for its living beauty and asthetic it brought to the park. The Court is going to have a hard time putting a value on it. A lazy judge might just use the lumber value, but shouldn't.

Also the $100K thrown out, according to the article, includes the cost of replanting several other trees that were damaged.

 

[Streetcar]

For road construction we are charged frequently for trees removed. The original tree was the only one cut for lumber, but other trees were cut or damaged for its removal