How Georgia Determines Responsibility for Fallen Trees

The Basics of Liability for Fallen Trees in Georgia

Georgia law places heavy emphasis on the concept of negligence and requires those who would pursue a claim for damages for that conduct to prove each element in order to establish liability for careless acts or omissions. This negligence standard is essential to be aware of when it comes to understanding your rights.
In Georgia:
Negligence is the failure to exercise the degree of care which a reasonably prudent person would be expected to exercise under similar circumstances" See, Ga. Pattern Jury Instructions 4th Civil § 401.10 (2000). This standard applies to property owners as well as their guests . This means that a landowner’s burden is essentially determined by what a reasonable person would have done in the landowner’s position. If an owner has acted carelessly (or negligently) by failing to keep his property safe for others, he or she may be liable for resulting damage. Negligence must be established in order for a person to ultimately be found liable for injuries or damages. When it comes to liability for a fallen tree, there are several different standards of care that a responsible party may be required to meet depending on the circumstances surrounding a case.

The Law on Fallen Trees on Private Property

Landowners in Georgia are generally responsible for the condition of trees on their property, including potential hazards and threats to neighbors. A tree that collapses may injure others and cause damage to vehicles or structures. If you experience an issue with a fallen tree from a neighbor’s property, it is important to understand the likelihood of liability for the neighbor.
Unlike some other states, Georgia does not have a "one call" fallen tree rule. A nearby tree that was healthy and living prior to falling will not lead to civil liability if it were to fall and cause damage. Even when a tree is dead but it was not obvious to the owner that it was potentially hazardous, an owner will not be required to pay for damages to a neighbor’s property:
…under the law of Georgia, it is the responsibility of the landowner to keep his trees in a reasonably safe condition. We adopt as part of the decision of this court the rule adopted by the great weight of authority in this country which relieves the owner of trees from liability to a third person who suffers injury or damage as a result of a calamitous event because of the existence of an otherwise sound tree unless the owner had actual knowledge that the tree was dangerous and so planted and maintained it as to constitute a nuisance and as to render itself a menace to persons lawfully using the highway. (emphasis added)
Coulter v. Martin, 25 S.E. 2d 91, 1937 Ga. LEXIS 237 (Ga. 1943).
On the other hand, if the tree was not healthy, then a neighbor may be liable for property damage or personal injury if it can be shown the defective condition of the tree directly caused the harm against public policy:
In Georgia, an owner who negligently permits a natural condition on his property (a diseased and dead tree) to damage another is liable for the harm even though he did not know the condition constituted a dangerous defect, i.e., a nuisance, and he did not know that the tree was likely to cause damage to persons or property. The injured party must show that the condition existed and that the property owner was negligent in permitting the condition to continue, and that the condition, as it existed, was the proximate cause of the resulting injury. (Emphasis added)
Ball v. Allen, 225 S.E.2d 436, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1539 (Ga. 1976); See also Salter v. Zachary, 6 Ga. App. 726, 65 S.E. 437 (1909).

Government Property and Fallen Tree Responsibility

Local governments in the State of Georgia do have a responsibility for the care and management of their property. The Local Government Authorities As revised Code of Georgia Annotated § 36-61-16, written in 1990 and amended in 2000, states: "Local Government Maintenance for criminal acts and neglect of property. No local government, or of its officers, agents, or employees shall maintain any premises in a condition which causes harm or injury to others as a result of criminal acts of third parties in such premises if the local government in the exercise of reasonable care could have foreseen the event which produced the harm." The Georgia Supreme Court has expressed the view that the government will not be held responsible for the actions of third parties. This means in effect that the state may not be liable for damage done by a tree that falls on a power line as a result of wind. These statutes have been enacted in an effort to limit governmental liability. Other case law as well emphasizes the distinction between personal and property liability of local governments. The law sets forth the standard for liability of the government as "gross negligence." Any other harm would be regarded merely as due care. However, if the condition that led to damage was intended, then the government might be bound for it. That is to say, negligence is not sufficient. In its place the courts require that the government intended harm in order to be held responsible. If authorities construct a sidewalk that eventually becomes an obstruction to pedestrians or damages their shoes, the government is not liable. But if officials decide to put a ditch next to a road without warning passersby, then it may be responsible. Only if the harm is intentional is the government liable. With that in mind, it would be almost impossible for a government to be responsible for falling trees. Almost always, wind, ice, or some other atmospheric condition is the cause of a tree falling. It would be damnably difficult to prove that the government is at fault. Again, though, if the state knows that a tree is rotted, then it needs to do something about it or be held accountable. However, as a plaintiff you would be hard-pressed to find a tree that did not deteriorate. It would be very difficult to prove aside from the rarity of the situation. Public property tangible by nature is the responsibility of the government. Government obligations to repair or regulate dangers are limited based on people exercising due care. The argument for the existence of third-party liability remains shaky at best.

Fallen Trees and Insurance Claims

If your tree falls on someone else’s property (or, vice versa), it is likely that you would turn to your homeowner’s policy for your legal liability in Georgia. Your homeowner’s policy should cover most of the damage caused by the fallen tree on the neighboring property, but only if that property is a dwelling-house or detached garage. A detached garage may include a boat house, too, although not all policy forms will consider a boat house to be a detached structure. Note that damage to fences may not be covered on the neighboring dwelling-house or detached garage because fences are not treated as buildings for these purposes. Breaks to power lines and other utility service lines may not be covered, either, because again, these items are not treated as buildings. Further, even if the damage is covered, insurance policies have deductibles and, therefore, insurance may not be cost-effective.
Other coverage issues may arise, depending upon the cause of the fallen tree. For example, if the tree’s root system was already compromised by disease and/or insects, then coverage under your policy’s ‘falling object’ coverage provision might also be excluded because the prescriptive loss occurred before the tree fell. In addition to exclusions for prescriptive losses , your insurance company may claim that the policyholder did not act quickly enough to prevent the losses and had a duty to remove/trim his or her tree before it fell (because know or should have known that the tree was diseased and/or infested with insects). Also, if your insurer claims that the tree was actually dead and therefore ‘going to fall anyway,’ then you might expect your insurer to rely upon the falling object exclusion. In these scenarios, your insurer may assert that your failure to remove/tram the tree prior to its fall on the other property caused the damage. If the falling object can be considered an avalanche of natural objects or falling weight, your insurer may deny coverage for losses that are caused directly by the avalanche, regardless of whether the event started as a falling object.
The policy considerations discussed above arise very frequently in cases involving fallen trees. To avoid mistakes that often lead to misunderstandings, policyholders would be wise to review their policy for the presence of unusual exclusions prior to purchasing a policy that insures a property with mature trees in the yard.

Resolving Tree or Branch Disputes

In Georgia, if two homeowners each own half of the property line at which a tree falls, then it would be presumed that the neighbor who owned the tree was responsible for any damage that the tree may have caused to the other neighbor’s property, but only up to an amount of $1,000. If the tree fell on your property and you and your neighbor disagree about responsibility for tree removal or damage, then you have options in how to resolve the dispute. Mediation is a low-cost option to resolve the dispute without going to court. Just like any other contract dispute, one of the two parties can send the other a letter demanding to meet with an impartial third-party mediator to settle the disagreement out of court. If the mediation does not result in an agreement between the parties, then either party can sue in small claims court if they believe the monetary value of the damage falls beneath the $15,000 limit. For both options, it’s highly recommended that you retain a lawyer, or at least seek their advice, prior to litigating the case in the small claims court. If the amount of damage caused by the fallen tree exceeds $15,000, or you don’t wish to go through the mediation or small claims process, then your best option may be to consult a lawyer to file suit in a basic civil action in a Georgia superior court. If your neighbor refuses to cooperate with any of these options, then your lawyer should be able to work with you to negotiate a resolution to any dispute. When considering litigation, the costs of both parties and the court system should be weighed against the likelihood of being successful in litigation.

Preventing Tree Falls and Proper Maintenance

Most property owners are not keen on spending money to maintain trees on their property that appear to be in relatively good condition. Many trees, however, are vulnerable due to age, disease, or poor pruning. It is a good idea to become familiar with the maintenance requirements of the trees on your property to minimize risks. A tree surgeon or other arborist is usually your best source of information, but most individuals can perform a basic inspection and determine if there are signs of trouble .
Major concerns include:
If you have any doubt about whether a tree poses a hazard, consult an expert. If you do agree with the assessment, removal of the tree may be necessary. In Georgia, if you do not act promptly to avoid damages to others from a tree on your property, the courts may not relieve you of liabilities resulting from that failure to act. Most property owners have trees, and taken care of properly they can add to the value of the property. Consulting with an expert when any questions arise certainly is good practice.