Pierson v Post

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

Supreme Court of New York

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

Nature of Case
Acquisition by Capture

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.

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.

SCH finding for Post was erroneous and ought be reversed

                                            Briefs Page 1

Shared By:
Description: Pierson v post case brief