A seven-year legal battle between two Little Compton neighbors took a dramatic turn last week, when workers took down 13 large trees, and trimmed many others, on Gregory DeJean’s West Main Road property, while neighbor Thomas Knudsen watched from a distance.

The trees were cut in compliance with a recent Rhode Island Supreme Court ruling on a suit originally brought by Knudsen and his children, who own property behind DeJean and complained that the trees, planted years ago by DeJean's late husband, were blocking his views of the Sakonnet River.

In March 2017, Knudsen sued DeJean, saying the trees' blocking of the river violated the terms of a 1989 legal agreement the property owners created primarily to preserve those views. In July 2022, the Newport County Superior Court ruled in Knudsen’s favor. 

In denying DeJean's subsequent appeal and siding with Knudsen, the state Supreme Court affirmed recently the original court’s requirements that DeJean make substantial changes to his landscaping, including the removal and/or trimming of numerous trees that Knudsen said blocked his view.

Knudsen’s lawsuit came about primarily because of his escalating concerns about landscaping work done by DeJean’s late husband, Philip Harper, who planted arborvitae trees on the couple’s property some time after the 1989 agreement went into effect.

“At the time, Mr. Knudsen was assured that the arborvitae would not grow very tall,” wrote Associate Justice Erin Lynch Prata in the recent Supreme Court opinion. “At present, the arborvitae and spruce trees screening the DeJean house from the Knudsen property have grown to a ‘mass of trees’ that splits the Knudsens’ view of the Sakonnet River in two.”

DeJean acknowledged last week that the trees had grown to a height of roughly 40 feet, which he said was a bit higher than the ridge of his house. He questioned, however, the extent to which the trees block the Knudsens’ view, because of the way their homes are situated in relation to the river.

“I’m at 65 feet above sea level. He’s at 100 feet,” he said.

“It’s not about the trees”

In separate interviews last week, both DeJean and Knudsen seemed to agree on one point. Both said “it’s not about the trees.”

DeJean contends that the 1989 agreement, which is also known as a restrictive covenant, is ambiguous. It was drafted by Knudsen, he said, and “seems to protect and benefit only him and is set to remain in effect until 2059.”

In a letter to the Sakonnet Times, DeJean wrote of his concerns "that this decision sets a troubling precedent. It prioritizes one individual’s view over the environmental benefits these trees provide, including shade during hot summers, habitat for local wildlife, and their role in our watershed.”

Aside from environmental concerns, DeJean said the removal of the trees caused him significant emotional pain.

“As I met and married Phil, our relationship grew alongside these trees, making them a living symbol of our life together ... The trees have stood sentinel, rooting me to my past, and metaphorically at least, protecting us from life’s storms.”

In addition to their adjacent properties, both DeJean and Knudsen are connected by family ties. DeJean’s late husband, Philip Harper, and Knudsen’s late wife, Laura Bucknell Knudsen, were first cousins whose grandparents built a homestead and farm on 40 acres off of West Main Road in the early 1900s. Ultimately, the property was divided into smaller parcels, including those now owned by the Knudsens and DeJean.

The 1989 agreement was created, Knudsen said, because family members wanted to “avoid a proliferation of housing on this beautiful piece of land.” He said he and his late wife had given up some acreage in exchange for protection of views and vistas.

Knudsen said he approached DeJean around 2015 or 2016, after both their spouses had passed away, asking for concessions on plantings which by that time were far more numerous and far higher than those that existed in 1989.

When conversations stalled, he said he felt compelled to go to court. The 1989 agreement, he said, had specific requirements to keep the land as it was at that time. Commenting on the outcome of the lawsuit, Knudsen said the court ruling was totally in his favor and confirmed the 1989 agreement was valid and its conditions still apply.

"Because he takes a different point of view from a contract in effect for 35 years, he is putting at risk all the terms of the agreement ... This issue is about far more than trees. It is about preservation of a covenant for my children and grandchildren.”

What’s next?

Knudsen said unresolved issues remain, since DeJean is not yet in full compliance with all of the court’s requirements, and DeJean acknowledged he is holding off on removal of certain additional plantings ordered by the court because their proximity to a freshwater pond requires approval by the Coastal Resources Management Council before they can be disrupted.

DeJean said he inspected his property after the job was done and found 15 nests on the ground, along with dead baby birds and a couple of robin’s eggs.

“Wildlife has a tough enough life as it is without us screwing up their place,” he said.

While he said he has come to a level of acceptance in terms of the transformation of his property, DeJean said his relationship with the Knudsen family, which was cordial in prior years, is forever altered. 

“This is a relationship that will never be restored on any level. It just can’t be. The trees are gone. It’s a done deal. It is more than just the trees. I just don’t understand why people behave the way they behave.”