Civil damages: trees.
Summary
Existing law provides damages of 3 times the sum that would compensate for the actual detriment caused by wrongful injuries to, or the removal of, timber, trees, or underwood upon the land of another, unless an exception applies. Among these exceptions, if the defendant had probable cause to believe that the land on which the trespass was committed was his or her own, or the land of the person in whose service or by whose direction the act was done, existing law provides damages of twice the sum that would compensate for the actual detriment. Existing law also provides damages in a sum equal to the actual detriment if wood was taken by the authority of highway officers for specified purposes. This bill would instead provide damages of 3 times the actual damage for intentional damage to, or removal of, timber, trees, or underwood upon the land of another. For negligent damage as described above, the bill would provide actual damages. For negligent damage sustained on the land of an owner who intended to make commercial use of the damaged timber, trees, or underwood, the bill would provide damages of 2 times the actual damage. The bill would also provide actual damages for wood taken by the authority of highway officers as described above. Existing law provides that any person who cuts down or carries off any wood or underwood, tree, or timber, or girdles or otherwise injures any tree or timber on specified lands without lawful authority is liable to the owner of that land, as specified, for treble the amount of damages that may be assessed in a civil action. This bill would instead hold a person liable for actual damages for the violations described above, except as provided. The bill would provide damages of 2 times the actual damage for violations that occur on the land of an owner who intended to make commercial use of the specified wood. The bill would also provide damages of 3 times the actual damage if the violation was intentional. This bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
Bill status
in committee
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2012
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 23, 2012
Last action May 8, 2012
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
6
Key actions
2
Committee
4
May 8, 2012
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Apr 9, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 29, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 24, 2012
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
CH
Curt Hagman
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2071
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2071. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline