Thanks nothotsuga for your explanation, I didn't know this part of historie. At school were I learned to become a nurseryman, I learned that the name was Chamaecyparis nootkatensis. Soon I learned that something wasn't right about this species because the cones were much differend then all the other Chamaecyparis species. Another thing was that it wasn't possible to graft the Chamaecyparis nootkatensis cultivars onto Chamaecyparis lawsoniana understock. Later on I heard that the name Chamaecyparis nootkatensis was renamed in Xanthocyparis nootkatensis because it was related to a new find conifer in Vietnam, Xanthocyparis vietnamensis. Lately I found out at this forum that a 3th name for this species was given, Cupressus nootkatensis which was allready given as the very first name you're telling me and that it was Spach (or Spät?) who named it in the wrong way as Chamecyparis nootkatensis... This is quite a story but the very sad thing is that in a lot of books discriptions are mentioned about Chamaecyparis nootkatensis and Xanthocyparis nootkatensis. I hope that this confusion will be explained in a good way in new written books. For me and other nurserymen is this new name a big problem because our customers are just familiar with the name Xanthocyparis and now whe have to tell them that also this name isn't right and that the correct name is Cupressus nootkatensis... How about the famous cross Cupressocyparis x leylandii? This name isn't possible, because Cupressus and Chamaecyparis will never cross. What should be the correct name for this plant, Cupressus x leylandii? Thanks again!

Thanks any of those trees would be good. I will make a note of them. I am going to put it near the deck, so I don't want one that would have a branches over hanging the deck or a fire danger problem. I never knew they could be so small. If it's near to the deck it would easier to run a cord out for Christmas lights, but maybe I can get solar powered ones? That should be the new thing in lights. But eventually, we are going to remove the deck anyway and make the deck smaller, so I can have more planting room. I like the tiny rock garden trees also, but they are very hard to find, the website said. They look like pin cushions. We have a lot of Monterrey Pines in San Francisco. They grow very fast and do a lot of damage to sideways the foundations of houses, and they are not very attractively shaped either. They even grow as weeds around here. We also have a lot of Norfolk Island Trees. They are big and people top them, and then they really look terrible. It's hard to see a healthy conifer in my area. The next most popular tree is the some kind of Cypress. I don't think we are as ideal as the Northwest for conifers.

thanks again for your all's replies...here are two photos. I was going to take more but of course right at that moment my battery died. I hope these can show enough to get an idea. The trunk of the tree is to the left of the first 2x4 (still unpainted -- we added it last summer). There was already a support structure built for it to go across the window when we got here. The second shows the weeping *and* the cracks in the sidewalk where the upright was before it came down. We think it would be fine to put the eco-pavers down at the second spot, but what to do about the concrete up by the house... bboy, it wasn't a case of toppling over from the root -- it broke about 8' up, just sheared. My guess is that the tight crotches made it weak, like bradford pears, and it sheared open where the first big branch came off the trunk. Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

"what about the tree makes you think it is in poor condition" For one, it has very few needles. The branches should be fully clothed with needles, whereas this one looks like only new growth is present. Also the pot it is in now may be adequate but the container it was in at the nursery could well have been too small, restricting root growth and causing stress. There is a limit to how much you can effectively train these into a serpentine form. If given room to grow and sufficient time, these get to be massive trees but the weight of the branching and the weeping habit keeps them low to the ground. They need to be trained along the top of a support system (like a fence) or the branches propped up if you don't want to allow the leader to just droop and grow naturally. And while I grow a great many conifers in containers, this is not a selection I would choose for that purpose on any sort of long term basis. It really needs to be in the ground. Check out these images to get a good sense of the potential for this tree.