A three-year statute of limitations may apply to a plaintiff's claim that neighbors trespassed, because the neighbors planted an invasive species on the neighbors' property that, years afterward, allegedly invaded the plaintiff's property. The plaintiff, Caryn Rickel, alleged that in or about 1997 the defendant neighbors planted invasive bamboo on the defendants' property. In 2005, a landscaper allegedly used a backhoe and a dump truck to eradicate invasive bamboo that had migrated from the defendants' property onto the plaintiff's property. In 2010, the plaintiff observed that the bamboo had once again re-entered the plaintiff's property. The plaintiff sued the defendant neighbors in November 2010, alleging negligence, nuisance and trespass. The defendants moved for summary judgment and argued that the plaintiff's negligence claims were not filed timely, prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations. The court found that the allegedly negligent act of the defendants took place in 1997 and that the plaintiff discovered actionable harm in 2005. The plaintiff's 2010 negligence and nuisance claims were not filed timely, prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations in Connecticut General Statutes §52-584. The court also found that the three-year statute of limitations in C.G.S. §52-577 applied to the plaintiff's trespass count. The critical act or omission complained about took place in 1997, when the defendants allegedly planted the invasive bamboo on the defendants' property. The plaintiff's claim that she was unaware in 1997 that the bamboo was an invasive species was not pertinent. The plaintiff's 2010 trespass claim was not filed timely, within three years of 1997. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff's negligence, nuisance and trespass counts.

VIEW FULL CASE