Property+Outline - I. Acquisition of Property A. Pierson v...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
I. Acquisition of Property A. Pierson v Post B. Doctrine case is one of the first impression for this court so the court looks at a lot of precedent from roman times including Justinian, Fleta 1. Procedural: P wins, D appeals. 2. Facts a) Post pursuing a fox along the beach b) Pierson sees pursuit and kills fox and carries it away. 3. Issue: Whether pursuit of wild animals (ferae naturae) constitutes occupancy when the animal is not physically touched or apprehended, 4. Rule: Court looks for rule; Justinina, Fleta, Barbeyac… Occupancy of ferae naturae only achieved though the entrapment, ensnaring or otherwise deprivation of liberty of the animal. 5. Conclusion: Reversed. C. Ghen v Rich U.S. Distrcit Court, MA, 1881 1. Procedural: 2. Facts: a) Fisherman from Provincetown kill whale on the open sea with a specially made harpoon that leaves an identifying mark. b) Whale washes up 3 days later on a beach about 17 miles from where shot.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
c) Finder auctions whale to highest bidder (D) who is in the business of rendering the whale blubber 3. Issue: Whether the original fishing party had taken possession of the whale when after killing it, the whale was not in their physical possession. 4. Rule: A recognized usage generally observed in a business prevails can establish the possession of an animal ferae naturae. 5. Analysis: The court first determines the local custom/usage regarding the whaling trade and determines that it is a recognized practice by whalers to use lances branded with a unique design as to indicate them. When the whales wash up on shore, a sort of finder’s (salvage) fee is given. The court cites two cases where the local usage determined the possessory rights. In the first case Bartlett, the libellant prevails because he is the first to establish possession that is firm and complete. In Swift, a custom among Arctic whalers held that when a whale was harpooned and not yet caught, if the fishermen remained in pursuit, the possession was theirs by right. In this case the libellant took possession of the whale in the only method available to him at the time. The local usage provided a recognized rule and that since the fisherman has done all that is possible to do to make the animal his own, that is sufficient. 6. Conclusion. Decree for libellant of $71.05.
Background image of page 2
D. Keeble v Hickeringill 1. Facts: a) 2 neighbors have ponds and duck decoys on their ponds. b) Defendant shoots his gun in the direction of p’s pond in order to scare ducks away. c) P sues D for interference with the profitable use of his land. 2. Issue: Whether the D has maliciously interfered with the P’s trade when he discharged his firearm and scared the ducks away from his neighbor’s pond. 3. Rule:
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 06/23/2008 for the course PROPERTY 101 taught by Professor Schwabach during the Spring '08 term at Thomas Jefferson School of Law.

Page1 / 14

Property+Outline - I. Acquisition of Property A. Pierson v...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online