Pierson v. Post: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
|holding=Judge Daniel Tompkins (the future [https://uspresidentialhistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Daniel-Tompkins1.15.22.pdf VP of the United States]): Pierson acquired ownership of the fox when he killed it. | |holding=Judge Daniel Tompkins (the future [https://uspresidentialhistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Daniel-Tompkins1.15.22.pdf VP of the United States]): Pierson acquired ownership of the fox when he killed it. | ||
|judgment=Reversed | |judgment=Reversed | ||
|reasons=[[Property_Dukeminier/Outline#Acquisition_by_Capture_(13-34)]] | |||
|rule=<u>Pursuit alone is not enough to give the pursuer property rights</u> | |rule=<u>Pursuit alone is not enough to give the pursuer property rights</u> | ||
Revision as of 21:00, April 24, 2024
| Pierson v. Post | |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
|---|---|
| Citation | 3 Cai. R. 175 |
| Date decided | 1805 |
Facts
- Mr. Post = an enthusiastic fox hunter
- Mr. Pierson = killer of the fox that Mr. Post was hunting
- Post claimed ownership of the dead fox in the early 1800s in the state of New York
- Pierson refused to hand over the dead fox
Procedural History
Post (regular fox hunter) sued Pierson for trespass.
Post won in the trial court.Issues
- Can a person obtain property rights over a wild animal merely by chasing it during a hunt?
- Who owns a dead animal?
Holding
Judge Daniel Tompkins (the future VP of the United States): Pierson acquired ownership of the fox when he killed it.
Judgment
Reversed
Reasons
Rule
Pursuit alone is not enough to give the pursuer property rights
according to
- Daniel Tompkins
- Fleta (a British source of Common Law)
- Justinian (Eastern Roman ruler)
- Henry of Bracton (1210 - 1268)
- Grotius (1583 - 1645)
- Samuel von Pufendorf (1632 - 1694)
- William Blackstone (1723 - 1780)
Comments
Henry Livingston (future SCOTUS justice 1757 - 1823) dissented: Pursuit of a wild animal is sufficient to acquire possessory rights over it.
Resources
