Short answer: not automatically. A city is liable for damage from a tree it owns only if the city had actual or constructive notice the tree was dangerous and failed to act, and even then, government tort-immunity statutes can block the claim. If a healthy city tree fell in a storm with no prior warning, the loss usually lands on you and your own insurer. It was the city's tree is not, by itself, enough.
Immunity first: natural conditions and discretion
Two layers of government immunity sit on top of the ordinary negligence rule. California immunizes public entities for natural conditions of unimproved public property outright:
"Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury caused by a natural condition of any unimproved public property"
California Government Code §831.2
And many states immunize discretionary policy choices, including how often a city inspects its trees. Illinois’ Tort Immunity Act is typical:
"a public employee serving in a position involving the determination of policy or the exercise of discretion is not liable for an injury resulting from his act or omission in determining policy when acting in the exercise of such discretion even though abused."
745 ILCS 10/2-201
The notice rule: the same one private owners get
Where immunity doesn’t bar the claim (e.g. a tree on improved public property), the city is treated like any landowner: liable only on notice. California requires it explicitly for a dangerous condition of public property:
"The public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under Section 835.2 a sufficient time prior to the injury to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition."
California Government Code §835(b)
New York’s highest court applied the same logic to a village’s trees:
"The village had a clear and nondelegable duty to maintain and inspect trees on village property which bordered county roads."
Harris v. Village of East Hills, 41 N.Y.2d 446 (1977)
The duty exists, but, as in the falling-tree rule generally, liability attaches only once the city had actual or constructive notice of the defect. No notice, no liability, even for the city’s own tree.
What this means, and how to file
- Healthy city tree, storm, no warning: the city is usually not liable. File with your own homeowner’s insurer.
- You reported the tree, or the defect was obvious: that notice is what can make the city liable. Keep every report, photo, and date, constructive notice (an obviously dead/leaning tree a reasonable inspection would catch) counts too.
- File a government claim, and watch the clock. Claims against a city or public entity run through a strict notice-of-claim process with short deadlines (often months, not years, e.g. a formal claim before you can sue). Missing the deadline can end the claim regardless of merit, so act fast and confirm your state/city’s filing rule.
This question runs through state tort-immunity law and case law, not a single city ordinance, and the rules vary by state, the sections above are illustrative (California and Illinois) of the pattern. This is general information, not legal advice; for a specific claim, confirm your jurisdiction’s immunity and claim-filing rules or consult an attorney. Related: who pays when a neighbor’s tree falls on your house and who pays for sidewalk tree-root damage.