I. READ the following NARRATIVE FACTS; CONSIDER the issues presented:

Billionaire Munn E. Gotz is an ocean-front estate/mansion homeowner in Malibu. Wealthy "digital entrepreneur" Dadd E. "Wore" Bux owns a neighboring estate/mansion, just north up Pacific Coast Highway, next door to the Gotz estate.

In a stellar display of "one-upsmanship" and of conspicuous wealth, Gotz installed a 26-foot-long blown glass sculpture entitled "Blowin' in the Wind" by artist Dylan Bobb, valued at over $25 million in his mansion's ocean-side yard.

Almost immediately, Bux became incensed at Gotz's "gross display" and complained loudly to the City of Malibu. Specifically, Bux claimed that the sculpture on Gotz's property was installed without proper City permits and had been "unnecessarily ugly", covered by a "hideously gross" net for weeks. Bux's grievance further alleged that, when uncovered, the smooth, crystal-clear surfaces of the sculpture acted like a magnifying glass, focusing the sun's rays on Bux's expensive, prize-winning "super azaleas," burning them to a crisp.

The City of Malibu issued "cease and desist" citations against Gotz, which largely was a waste of paper, as the City lacked the personnel to enforce the citations.

Not used to being ordered around, Gotz responded to the citations "like a boss" (more like a "Boss Baby"), by playing loud music, including, repeatedly, The Trashmen's 1963 surfing anthem, "Surfin' Bird", aka, "Bird is the Word" - annoying played once; sheer torture played repetitively. Gotz's strategy was to try to get Bux to drop his complaints, and, if that failed, to bug the living daylights out of Bux ("Maybe he'll move!").

Gotz's "antics" failed to persuade Bux to drop his formal grievances filed with the City. Bux waited weeks for the City to execute its threat to remove the sculpture permanently, but Bux grew frustrated, and seeing Gotz being picked up by a limo one day, he threatened to give Gotz's sculpture "a good kick in the glass."

However, one warm summer evening, while Gotz was hosting a black-tie, double-header, "invite-only" concert by Kenny G and Michael Bolton (Prof. Simonian's worst musical nightmare), Gotz discovered large broken pieces of glass in the grass (the lawn, not marijuana). Much like his precious sculpture, Gotz was shattered. He immediately blamed his neighbor, Bux, and he sued Bux for millions.

After being served with Gotz's lawsuit, Bux, though his lawyer, immediately filed both a "complete denial" of Gotz's allegations and also a cross-complaint against Gotz, seeking millions in compensatory and punitive damages, for Gotz's harassment and for property damage caused by Gotz's sculpture.

At trial, Bux denied ruining Gotz's sculpture personally and claimed that the damage actually was "retribution by God" against Gotz, as the million-dollar art piece was broken accidentally by a falling palm frond from one of the many palm trees lining the Bux estate. Because it was an unintended, uncontrollable "act of nature, not of man", he could not be held liable, Bux testified poetically.

Assume that Gotz's glass sculpture was destroyed and completely beyond repair, worthless except maybe for recycling (mere pennies on the dollar).

Assuming that Bux has admitted in his trial testimony that a palm frond from a tree on Bux's own property fell, struck, and destroyed Gotz's glass sculpture, under California law, will Bux be held liable to Gotz for this damage?

If so, (1) identify and define the specific property tort (or torts) that Gotz could claim applies/(apply) to Bux's behavior; (2) explain why Bux's claimed defenses (i.e., Act of God; accidental damage) do not apply to insulate Bux from liability; and (3) citing specific Narrative Facts, identify each property tort claim Gotz will prevail on (win) and explain why he will win.

OR, if not, (1) identify and define the specific property tort (or torts) that Gotz could claim applies/(apply) to Bux's behavior; (2) explain why Bux's claimed defenses (i.e., Act of God; accidental damage) apply to insulate Bux from liability; and (3) citing specific Narrative Facts, identify each property tort claim Gotz will lose and explain why he will lose.