Obolensky v. Trombley

Michael and Jirina Obolensky (plaintiffs) sued their neighbors Robert and Sandra Trombley (defendant) to settle a bitter dispute as to the boundary line between their properties. The value of both properties lay largely in their mountain views. Based on the parties’ stipulations, the trial court set a new boundary, which the court permitted the parties to mark with any fence allowed by town ordinance. The Obolenskys exploited this permission to build a stockade boundary fence as high as their town permitted. The fence completely obstructed the Trombleys’ mountain view. The Trombleys filed a postjudgment motion seeking the fence’s removal, citing Vermont’s spite-fence statute. As in other New England states, Vermont’s statute made it illegal to erect a fence for the purpose of annoying neighbors by obstructing the neighbors’ view or depriving the neighbors of light or air. The court found that the Obolenskys’ fence complied with the town’s height restriction, marked a property boundary, and contributed to the Obolensky property’s privacy. However, the court also found that the Obolenskys had already protected their privacy by planting trees near the property line. After concluding that the Obolenskys’ real reason for building the fence was to provoke the Trombleys, the court ordered a reduction in the fence’s height. The Obolenskys appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court.