Judge Sides with Costner

Thursday, April 4, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

Actor Kevin Costner — a defendant in a lawsuit filed by a neighbor in Carpinteria who alleges that trees on Costner’s property block views from his own property — received a favorable decision from Judge Thomas Anderle Tuesday morning, who said that just because the neighbor’s view was blocked doesn’t mean it was done to annoy him. Potted plants abut a fence separating the two properties. There are still several facts at issue, however, as the two sides head toward a trial.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Dances with Shrubbery.

native2sb (anonymous profile)
April 4, 2013 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Field of trees.

Botany (anonymous profile)
April 4, 2013 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Unmulchables

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 4, 2013 at 10:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Walnut World

sa1 (anonymous profile)
April 4, 2013 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A Perfect Willow

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 4, 2013 at 8:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Shades of Rob Lowe. Why can't people be better neighbors? Costner needs to save some face on this one and stop being so entitled and inconsiderate.

I am all for people enjoying their property, but it shouldn't come at the expense of destroying someone else's enjoyment of his/her property.

There are several new trees I can see from my house that are slated to destroy completely my 1/2 million $$$ view. Neither tree is anything special, just huge and fast-growing. I love, love, love all plants but, in cases such as this one, neighbors need to keep vertical growth to a minimum and be considerate of others. When a view is there and then a tree or other plant is installed that destroys that view, that is not right---at all.

I bet the other person was there first, too. Shameful. Costner, you can afford to be a mensch.

chilldrinfthenight (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 2:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

true, chilldrinfthenight.....I Costner probably doesn't even live there half of the time.....

topcat (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 6:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

While I agree that neighbors should be neighborly, no one has a "right" to a view at the expense of trees. If that were the case, there wouldn't be many trees left at this point. Blocking views with structures is another matter. It's amusing how some like "childrin..." and "topcat" somehow know the mind and intent of Costner whom they automatically judge as being guilty of boorish Hollywoodish behavior. Love the alternative movie titles, though... How about this one: "An Imperfect World"? Or maybe, "Message in a Battle"...

Pagurus (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 6:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another story was done on this lawsuit with more detail:

Does it change anyone's opinion that Grimm is an investment banker who said "when he bought the land, he sent a letter to his neighbors making it clear that he would be using the property as a vacation rental"?

Or that "Costner’s wife, Christine, wrote in a 2009 email to Grimm that the hedges are in place to protect the family’s privacy from vacationers who rent Grimm’s property and supposedly peer over the fence to catch glimpses of the celebrity family."?

Chester_Arthur_Burnett (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

One would hope that "chilldrin..." and "topcat" would be shamed into an apology... Thanks for the additional post, Chester.

Pagurus (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Whether Grimm notified the property was going to be a rental or not does not excuse privacy invasion. If people like "chilldrin.." and "topcat" might be okay with people peering thru their windows, most people are not.
In addition I am quite confident that Costner has done more to help protect the environment than you two combined., for starters.
Let's set up bleachers and we can all watch you two 24/7.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 5, 2013 at 11:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Chilldrin" and "topcat" The Costner's home is just a one story family home smaller than that of most middle class people I know - not oversized garish mansion that looks like 2 story submarine that "Investment Banker" Grimm purchased in 2009 as for use as rental property. Costner has his family to protect and the right to privacy that any of us desire especially when Grimm is renting it for prying eyes. Grimm has the whole other side of his 2 story submarine for his renters to have a beautiful ocean view. The homes are extremely close together - closer than most CA homes. Costner is a longtime owner.

Carly (anonymous profile)
July 21, 2013 at 12:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: