Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

TASTEFUL FRIENDS : $10M Nantucket home subject of lawsuit

A Nantucket homeowner is suing their neighbor, seeking over $1.4 million in damages, and accusing them of trespassing into their yard earlier this year and cutting down a stand of 50-year-old trees in order to create an ocean view for themselves from the abutting property. The alleged perpetrator subsequently listed their property for sale for nearly $10 million while touting its “sweeping ocean views.”

“The Defendant's actions were calculated to enhance the ocean view from his own residence at 3 Tautemo Way and were carried out with full knowledge that he lacked any legal right to do so," the lawsuit says. "The trees at issue were planted by the Belford family in the 1970s and maintained for nearly five decades. Their removal was not only a violation of the Plaintiff's property rights, but also caused lasting damage to the character, value, and privacy of the property.”

According to the lawsuit, Jonathan Jacoby was identified as the neighbor alleged to have conducted the tree cutting and lives at 3 Tautemo Way. The alleged victim, Patricia Belford, owns the abutting property at 1 Tautemo Way. Belford said the line of mature trees and vegetation had served for decades as a natural buffer and privacy screen between their home and neighboring parcels. The trees cut down included cedar, cherry, and leyland cypress, many of which were over 30 feet in height and decades old.

“These trees formed a natural barrier between the Belford home and Hummock Pond Road and provided shade, aesthetic value, privacy, and noise mitigation,” the lawsuit says.

Around February 22, Belford said Jacoby walked across their driveway to the south/southwest portion of the property and cut down over 16 mature trees without any notice or permission from her.

“The extent and location of the cutting, many feet away from the parties' shared property line, demonstrates this was no mistake,” the lawsuit says. “Jacoby performed this conduct intentionally and with the specific purpose of improving the ocean view from his own property located at 3 Tautemo Way.”

Jacoby's former landscaper, Krasimir Kirilov, provided a voluntary statement to the police where he told them Jacoby admitted to cutting down trees on the Belford property, and that Jacoby asked Kirilov to assist him with cleanup work. Kirilov said as he was about to finish the cleanup when the Belford's property manager Matt Erisman arrived at the property and was unaware of the cleanup work being done. Kirilov said when he explained to Erisman what was going on, Erisman told him he had no idea about what was going on. It led to Kirilov calling Jacoby, putting him on the phone with Erisman, and Erisman telling Kirilov he could leave after concluding his phone call with Jacoby.

Jacoby has since listed his 3 Tautemo Way property on the market with J Pepper Frazier, and the property description describes the home as being “developed and situated to capture the sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean, Hummock Pond, and the 780 acres of conservation land between Hummock Pond and Madaket.” Belford said the views of the ocean are a result of the tree cutting, and not mentioned in the previous listing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18July 5, 2025 7:35 PM

There once was a house from Nantucket...

by Anonymousreply 1July 5, 2025 1:30 PM

Here's the property listing for the $10M Nantucket home, complete with photos inside and out.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 2July 5, 2025 1:43 PM

It's hardly as extreme, but the crazy husband of one of my relatives has bragged to me about how he has gone around cutting branches and the tops of trees so that they can have a view of the ocean from the upstairs bedroom balcony of their cottage, in Maine. They are about 2 streets away from the ocean. The trees are all rather small around there.

There was a sort of formless-looking evergreen type of tree in the people's yard across the street, next to the road. He started cutting branches off it when the people weren't there. After maybe about two years but it started to die, and had to be cut down. He has also gone to other streets and has cut branches off small trees. Anyhow, another neighbor saw him cutting branches off the evergreen and told the owners. Now they don't speak to him. But he does have a view of the beach now.

by Anonymousreply 3July 5, 2025 2:26 PM

Another shithead that figures it's always better to beg for forgiveness than to ask permission.

Unfortunately, they're right; that's how the world works.

The story doesn't make a big enough point about the fact that the owners of the desecrated property are off-site in a home - I'm guessing a care facility - meaning they weren't ever there and certainly not there when the offending neighbor hired people to do his dirty work.

I'd also like an interview of the people that cut down all the trees.

by Anonymousreply 4July 5, 2025 2:28 PM

We don't see a problem with this.

by Anonymousreply 5July 5, 2025 2:31 PM

The rich have a different court system. A good friend of ours was heavily fined and nearly went to jail for clearing fallen dead trees and brush in front of their lake front home. This was an old home, handed down generations, not wealthy people at all. He felt he was doing a service as it was a fire hazard. It did not improve their water view or provide more lake access. Nope. The town came down on him like a ton of bricks (on Cape Cod). No good deed goes unpunished.

by Anonymousreply 6July 5, 2025 2:43 PM

R6 You don't say why he was heavily fined. Were the trees and brush not on town land, or what?

by Anonymousreply 7July 5, 2025 5:14 PM

R6 I meant: not on his land.

by Anonymousreply 8July 5, 2025 5:15 PM

Correction. I should have typed "... it's always [bold]easier[/bold] to beg for forgiveness than to ask permission."

There's nothing better about it.

by Anonymousreply 9July 5, 2025 5:21 PM

A fight between the arriviste and Old Money!

by Anonymousreply 10July 5, 2025 5:42 PM

He should have held out for prune danish.

by Anonymousreply 11July 5, 2025 5:48 PM

That would get you a $20k+ fine in Austin. I think it’s about $1500 per tree, depending on circumference.

by Anonymousreply 12July 5, 2025 5:54 PM

The stupid asshole violated personal property laws & cut down perfectly good trees in Nantucket. Plus, they're old people who been there forever on the island. The court is going to soak his new money ass.

by Anonymousreply 13July 5, 2025 6:08 PM

Wow, that’s the best (worst?) example of a Masshole I’ve ever read.

by Anonymousreply 14July 5, 2025 6:09 PM

Man that is dirty. Just downright dirty.

by Anonymousreply 15July 5, 2025 6:25 PM

There is a Jacoby that works for Blackstone in NYC. It wouldn't surprise me if it was this person.

by Anonymousreply 16July 5, 2025 6:48 PM

This type of action - clearing the trees on a property that doesn't belong to one - is not at all that uncommon. Hence my comment that "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask permission."

Unless your locality has laws on the books - and/or monetary damages - that specifically prohibits it or punishes it, if someone clear cuts your property, you're shit out of luck other than possibly a trespassing charge. Even if there's a fine, people don't give a shit if their clearing of the property gets them what they wanted. And they didn't have to ask for permission and be denied.

And, in any case, your trees are still gone. They can't be replaced with the same size and age. No matter how much money you may get awarded.

by Anonymousreply 17July 5, 2025 6:57 PM

This reminds me of so many Judge Judy cases I have seen over the years (seriously). Each season she always had a few of these cases on - some neighbor cuts down or trims back shrubs and trees without the owner's permission. Even when the trees or shrubs / hedges separate the property lines.

And each and every time, Judy gives the plaintiff the maximum they are asking, since the trees / shrubs can't be replaced. The defendant always claims 'they didn't know it belonged to the owner', or 'they were doing the owner a favor'. Over and over she has said, 'If the greenery hangs over to your side, you have every right to prune and trim it back. However, you have no right to remove it without the owner's permission'.

by Anonymousreply 18July 5, 2025 7:35 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!