Court Bars Neighbor From Reopening Tree Dispute
Michigan's Court of Appeals held that a Livingston County man cannot relitigate a tree-removal dispute already decided between neighbors.
Updated on Nov. 5, 2026 in Landscaping
The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Seth Merle cannot reopen a dispute over trees on neighbor Richard Hagopian's Livingston County property that a prior case had already decided. The ruling leaves in place an earlier order that Merle repay Hagopian $2,000 plus court costs.
Why it matters
The decision reinforces the principle that a claim resolved between two parties generally cannot be refiled, even when the underlying concern about the property remains. For Michigan homeowners sharing tree-removal costs, it underscores the importance of written agreements that spell out refund terms.
The dispute centers on a $4,000 tree-removal cost split equally, with each neighbor contributing $2,000. The removal work was never completed, and it is not reported whether Hagopian has recovered his contribution.
The players
Michigan Court of Appeals
The state's intermediate appellate court, which reviews decisions from Michigan's trial courts and issued the ruling barring Merle's second lawsuit.
The details
Merle and Hagopian agreed to each contribute $2,000 toward removing trees on Hagopian's property, with Merle organizing the work. When the removal was never carried out, a small claims court ordered Merle to repay Hagopian $2,000 plus costs, and it dismissed Merle's claim that Hagopian was negligent in maintaining the trees.
Timeline
September 23, 2026: Michigan Court of Appeals rules Merle cannot reopen the dispute.
Landscaping Context
Under Michigan's res judicata doctrine, a court will not hear a second lawsuit between the same parties over an issue already decided, which the appeals court applied to this tree dispute. The ruling shows that disagreements over shared trees can end up governed by the outcome of an earlier small claims case.
Homeowners sharing tree-removal costs should document agreements in writing, including refund terms if work is not completed. Without that record, disputes like this one may end up in court.
The takeaway
Put shared landscaping agreements in writing, including what happens to contributions if the work is never done, to avoid costly disputes between neighbors.
Further reading
Explore more on Landscaping for tips on managing trees shared between neighboring properties.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Economic Times.
