It’s a classic suburban nightmare. Mr. and Mrs. Zito had lived in their home for years, enjoying a thick, green barrier of eight trees that separated their house from their neighbor’s. But when Mr. Arneson moved in next door a year ago, he didn’t see a beautiful landscape—he saw a property line violation that prevented him from even opening his car door.

The Assault on the Arches

The conflict reached a breaking point during a hot July weekend. While the Zitos were away on vacation, a fire—allegedly started by fireworks—broke out in one of the trees. Mr. Arneson didn’t just put out the fire; he cut the tree down. But he didn’t stop there. By the time the Zitos returned, seven more trees had been pruned so aggressively they were essentially destroyed.

In Judge Judy’s courtroom, the Zitos were devastated. They claimed Mr. Arneson had “assaulted” their property without a single word of warning.

The “Truth Machine” Intervenes

Judge Judy, self-proclaimed as a “truth machine,” immediately sensed a lie. Mrs. Zito adamantly claimed there was never a conversation about the trees. But when Judge Judy turned her gaze toward Mr. Zito, the story shifted.

“I’m a truth machine,” she warned. “Take a deep breath. Did he have a conversation with you in July regarding the trees?”

Under the pressure, Mr. Zito’s story crumbled. He admitted that after the first tree was cut, they did go next door. Mr. Arneson had explained the fire hazard and his intent to clear the property line. The “total surprise” the Zitos had claimed was actually a long-standing dispute they simply refused to resolve.

A Layperson’s Perspective
The Zitos tried to present a professional property survey to prove the trees were theirs. Judge Judy pushed it aside. She looked at the photos—the Zitos’ own photos.

“I don’t read surveys,” the Judge declared. “I’m using my layperson’s eyes.” The photos showed the truth: while the trunks might have started on the Zitos’ side, the massive roots and branches were completely encroaching on Mr. Arneson’s driveway.

The Final Verdict: “Wife, Not So Much”

Judge Judy acknowledged that the trees were likely beautiful once, but they had become a burden that Mr. Arneson was not legally required to live with. He had an absolute right to cut anything hanging over his property line.

In a final, sharp observation, Judge Judy pointed out that Mr. Zito seemed like a reasonable “tree lover” from Oregon, but suspected the real wall to progress was his wife.

“Knowing you, you might have been reasonable. Wife, not so much,” she remarked. “You can fight all you like, but he doesn’t have to live that way.”

The Ruling:

The Zitos’ Case: Dismissed. They had no claim for the trees because the trees were encroaching.

Mr. Arneson’s Counterclaim: Dismissed. He got his driveway space back, but he had to clean up the debris.

The Great Tree War ended not with a settlement, but with a simple lesson: when your “tiny stalk” grows into your neighbor’s car door, it’s time to stop fighting and start talking.

Key Legal Takeaway: Encroachment
In many jurisdictions, if a neighbor’s tree branches or roots grow onto your property, you have the “Right to Self-Help.” This means you can generally trim the branches or roots up to the property line, provided you do not kill the tree.