On Thu, 26 May 2011 08:48:13 -0700 (PDT), John
wrote:

I'm curious about people's opinions on the following not-so-
hypothetical situation:

If you have two neighbors, call them Dan and Bob. There is a tree
whose trunk is on Dan's property, but there are branches that overhang
onto Bob's property, in fact, one branch hangs over Bob's pool causing
Bob some grief. The tree is mature, and existed before either moved
into their houses, Bob wants that branch (and several others)
trimmed, but Dan does not want to trim the tree on his property.
Who's responsibility is it to have the branch trimmed?

I know that Dan has no legal obligation to trim the tree, but is there
an implied moral obligation (it's Dan's tree therefore he should trim
it), or is it implied that the trim is for Bob's sole benefit,
therefore Bob should do it? (And splitting the cost does not seem to
be an option here).
If Dan gives Bob permission to trim the tree, even if Bob needs to
pay to have it done, Bob should consider himself fortunate.

There have been many cases of "Dans" refusing to allow "Bobs" to trim
"Dand's" tree, and many court cases when "Bob" has done so without
"Dan's" permission.

Just trim the tree, or have it trimmed and pay the bill.