Legal Opinion

Lewis v. Krussell

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided June 16, 2000No. 24599-0-IIPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeinfeld, J.

During a windstorm, two large healthy hemlock trees fell on the home of Dawn Lewis and Darold Teitzel. Lewis and Teitzel sued Gary and Nancy Krussel, who owned the property on which the trees had been growing. Because there was no evidence that the Krussels had any reason to believe that these particular trees posed a hazard, the trial court granted the Krussels’ motion for summary judgment. On appeal, Lewis and Teitzel urge us to hold that a landowner who has notice that other trees of *180the same species have fallen has a duty to remove his healthy trees. We decline to so hold and, thus,…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Loescher v. ParrSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1975
  2. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. ATHERTON CONDO APARTMENT-OWNERS ASS'N BD OF DIRECTORS v. Blume Dev. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Hertog v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lewis v. KrusselCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  2. Rosengren v. City of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  3. Ann Chaudhry , V Tyson D. DayCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API