KYLE J. MOSTELLER V. GELLA NAIMAN AND COYNE TREE SERVICE, INC.
A-2546-09T2 12-03-10
Defendant negligently removed six mature trees, which the parties thereafter discovered had been situated on plaintiff's adjoining property, which he leased to two tenants.
The trial court correctly ruled that a diminution-of- market-value measure of damages, rather than a replacement-cost measure, would be sufficient to compensate plaintiff for his loss. Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the trees had special or peculiar value to him, as required under Huber v. Serpico, 71 N.J. Super. 329, 345 (App. Div. 1962). In addition, the trial court's chosen method of calculating damages avoided economic waste, given that the estimated costs to replace the trees nearly exceeded plaintiff's costs to purchase the premises approximately a year earlier.
