In St. George's Operating & Improvement Co., Inc. v. Wilson, (81 AD3d 632 [2d Dept 2011]) plaintiff alleged that defendant had entered upon its land and removed trees. (Id. at 632.) The lower court granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability and held an inquest on damages. (Id.) At the inquest, plaintiff stated on the record that it was only seeking stumpage value and would not seek any restoration costs. Plaintiff's expert testified as to his calculations of the stumpage value of the trees removed. Included in his calculations were the replacement cost of the trees and the cost to procure, transport, install, and guarantee those trees. The lower court awarded stumpage value based on the expert's calculations. (St. George's at 632.) On appeal, defendant argued that plaintiff did not meet its burden in proving damages because its expert's calculations were defective as they improperly included replacement value, installation cost, and current costs. The Second Department affirmed the lower court's award of stumpage value damages stating: "The damages award was supported by an expert appraisal that set forth the objective facts underlying the valuation of the removed trees and that employed methods of calculation consistent with the statute (see RPAPL 861 [2], [3]; see generally Western NY Land Conservancy, Inc. v. Cullen, 66 AD3d 1461, 1462-1464 [2009])." (St. George's at 632.)