SUSAN MONDIE VS. CHRISTOPHER LINTON (L-2371-17, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-0564-20

On July 13, 2016, Susan Mondie tripped on a raised sidewalk slab in front of defendants' Barnegat home, fracturing her left wrist and later undergoing surgery.
Plaintiffs alleged a nearby Callery pear tree raised the slab by its roots and that defendants or their predecessors in title planted the tree.
Plaintiffs' expert reviewed aerial photos (1972–2017) and opined the tree was planted after development and that shallow pear roots can lift sidewalks, but did not measure tree-to-sidewalk distance, trace roots beneath the slab, or explain root spread causation.
Defendants denied planting trees on the property and moved for summary judgment after discovery; the trial court granted the motion, finding plaintiffs offered only speculation on who planted the tree and insufficient causation proof.
Plaintiffs appealed, arguing disputed facts over planting/ownership precluded summary judgment.
The Appellate Division affirmed: plaintiffs failed to prove defendants or predecessors planted the tree or establish competent causation evidence, so no duty or triable negligence claim existed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plaintiffs produced competent evidence that defendants or their predecessors planted the tree (creating an affirmative duty) and that tree roots caused the sidewalk elevation, precluding summary judgment	Mondie: aerial photos and expert show the tree was planted post-construction by the developer/predecessor and its roots raised the slab, creating a duty/liability	Defendants: they did not plant the tree; plaintiffs bear the burden to prove who planted it and to show roots caused the defect; expert opinions are speculative/net opinions	Affirmed summary judgment: plaintiffs failed to prove who planted the tree or provide competent causation evidence; net opinion rejected; no duty established

Templo Fuente De Vida Corp. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 224 N.J. 189 (2016) (de novo review standard for summary judgment)
Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (1995) (standard for determining genuine issue of material fact)
Davis v. Brickman Landscaping, Ltd., 219 N.J. 395 (2014) (plaintiff must prove negligence elements with competent proof)
Luchejko v. City of Hoboken, 207 N.J. 191 (2011) (residential owners liable only if they create or exacerbate sidewalk hazards)
Deberjeois v. Schneider, 260 N.J. Super. 518 (App. Div. 1992) (owner liability when owner or predecessor planted tree foreseeably causing sidewalk damage)
Dawson v. Bunker Hill Plaza Assocs., 289 N.J. Super. 309 (1996) (net expert opinions insufficient to survive summary judgment)
Kieffer v. Best Buy, 205 N.J. 213 (2011) (definition and rejection of net opinions)
Buckelew v. Grossbard, 87 N.J. 512 (1981) (expert opinion must explain causal connection)
Puder v. Buechel, 183 N.J. 428 (2005) (conclusory, self-serving assertions cannot defeat summary judgment)