Docstoc

Pierson v Post

Document Sample
Pierson v Post Powered By Docstoc
					Pierson v. Post                                                                                           Property


Supreme Court of New York
1805



Parties
∏ - Post (hunter)
Δ -Pierson (shooter)

Nature of Case
Acquisition by Capture


Issue
By chasing a ferae naturae, wild animal, does it give the chaser rights to that animal?


Fact Summary
Δ and his dogs and hounds were hunting, chasing and pursuing a fox on a beach, property not belonging to him
or Π. Π knowing the Δ was chasing the fox, shot, killed and took the fox away. Δ claimed fox belonged to him.


Procedural History
TCH - found for Post.

ACH - Pierson sued for certiorari (writ of appellate court directing lower court to deliver record in case for
review). And then assigned for error, the declaration and the matters therein contained were not sufficient in
law to maintain an action.

Sent to Supreme Court of NY


Rule of Law
Starting or pursuing wild animals, w/o having control or wounded to kill or killed of such animal does not give the
pursuer any legal right to that animal.


Reasoning
In looking into other cases, it is determined that the fox is ferae naturae (wild animal) and not ratione soli (of the
soil) and from those cases the court's rationale is, for a person to merely to pursue a wild animal does not give
them any right of possession to the animal . But if that wild animal is captured or killed by another person, then
it is the possession of that person.


Holding
SCH finding for Post was erroneous and ought be reversed




                                            Briefs Page 1

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Stats:
views:31
posted:7/19/2012
language:English
pages:1
Description: Pierson v post case brief