DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Kanagaroo Kort
HTML https://kangarookort.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Property
*****************************************************
#Post#: 8--------------------------------------------------
Keeble v. Hickeringill
DIR By: kangaroo
Date: January 26, 2011, 6:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
FACTS: P owned land with a decoy pond which was used to lure
wildfowl and D discharged guns on two occasions that drove away
the fowl that were in the pond.
2 Threads to this case:
(1) Property Issue: Wild ducks on Private Land—as property (not
P’s property, he just has the exclusive right to hunt them)
PROPERTY RIGHTS CANNOT BE THE BASIS FOR THIS CASE
(2) Tort Issue:
- What interest protected here?
- From what type of invasion—under tort law?
* Keeble was going to profit from the ducks so D was
interfering with his profits (interference with prospective
economic claim)
- What interest is NOT protected under tort law?
Constructive Possession
Implicit in the notion of land ownership is the right to exclude
others from let’s say hunting wild animals on your land
PROCEDURE: SJ/P
ISSUE: Was the disturbance of P and the driving away of the
wildfowl by D unlawful?
RULES:
-
occupation, profession, or way of getting a livelihood, there an
action lies in all cases.
-
toll for horses sold: a man is brining his horse to market to
sell: a stranger hinders and obstructs him from going thither to
the market: an action lies, because it imports damage
ANALYSIS: There is great reason to give encouragement thereunto;
that the people who are so instrumental by their skill and
industry so to furnish the markets should reap the benefit and
have their action.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1