Marty, I think you are right about the maple/sycamore distinction in the US. Genus acer is definitely maple, and what we call a sycamore around here is no maple. The most beautiful tree in the township is a sycamore perched on the top of a hill.

Anyway, the subject "trees" also brought to mind an appellate court opinion. The following is an honest-to-gosh published, binding law, opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued in 1983. Background: the plaintiff is a litigious sort, who sued in tort for damage to his oak tree caused when one of the defendants drove his car into the tree. Under Michigan's no fault insurance act, the defendants were immune. The trial court granted judgment for the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed. This is the entire text of the opinion, excluding footnotes:

We thought that we would never see
A suit to compensate a tree.

A suit whose claim in tort is prest
Upon a mangled tree's behest;

A tree whose battered trunk was prest
Against a Chevy's crumpled crest;

A tree that faces each new day
With bark and limb in disarray;

A tree that may forever bear
A lasting need for tender care.

Flora lovers though we three,
We must uphold the court's decree.

Affirmed.

Fisher v Lowe,, 122 Mich App 418 (1983).