Van Voast v. Blaine County

In my opinion the majority opinion construes section 2209, Revised Codes 1935, too strictly and not with the liberality commanded by section 4, Revised Codes 1935.

I believe, since plaintiff was a tenant at will of the property and since he was using it for grazing purposes, he must be held to be an occupant within the meaning of that term as used in section 2209. “To constitute occupancy it is not necessary that a person build a house upon land, or that he live there, ’ ’ (Little v. Riley, 120 Misc. 707, 199 N. Y. S. 422, 424) or that the land be occupied or possessed in such a way as might…