Pierson v. Post

Supreme Court of New York · 1805 · Property

Propertyacquisitionfirst possessionwild animalscapture rulewild animalsferae naturaeoccupancy

Facts

Post was pursuing a fox with his hounds in the manner alleged in his declaration. The fox was an animal ferae naturae, and the parties admitted that property in such animals is acquired by occupancy only. Pierson intercepted, killed, and carried away the fox during Post's pursuit. The dispute was whether Post's pursuit gave him a property right sufficient to sustain an action against Pierson.

Issue

Does pursuit of a wild animal with hounds, without actual capture or equivalent control, give the pursuer a property right in the animal sufficient to support an action against another who intercepts and kills it?

Rule

Mere pursuit of a wild animal does not vest property or a legal right in the pursuer. Occupancy requires actual corporal possession or acts that equally deprive the animal of its natural liberty and bring it within the pursuer's certain control, such as actual capture, mortal wounding while pursuit continues, or enclosing or ensnaring the animal so escape is impossible.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In rural Vermont, Noah Mercer spent the afternoon chasing a wild coyote across open fields with two tracking dogs. Before Noah touched, wounded, or trapped the animal, Liam Cross stepped out from a nearby stone wall, shot the coyote, and carried it away.

Who has the superior property claim to the coyote?

Explanation. The majority rule is that wild animals are acquired by occupancy only, and mere pursuit is not occupancy. Because Noah had neither actually captured the coyote nor mortally wounded it while continuing pursuit, nor trapped it so as to deprive it of natural liberty and place it under certain control, he had no property right. Liam, who killed and took the animal, acquired it first.