Aylesworth v. Herrington
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw Circuit. This was an action of trespass brought to recover damages alleged to have been committed by the cattle of defendant upon plaintiff’s premises. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff. The tacts are stated in the opinion. At common law no person is bound to fence against the beast of another.
Read the full summary
Error to Washtenaw Circuit. This was an action of trespass brought to recover damages alleged to have been committed by the cattle of defendant upon plaintiff’s premises. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff. The tacts are stated in the opinion. At common law no person is bound to fence against the beast of another. The owners of beasts are liable for any damage done by them .on the lands of another, and can have no defense to an action for such damages, unless by virtue of some statute, or by prescription or agreement. In this case the only defense claimed is the Act 179, Laws of…
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley Ch. J.
Aylesworth sued the defendants in trespass, and, on the trial, gave evidence tending to show that, on several occasions in the years 1866 and 1867, the cattle of the said defendants broke and entered the close of the plaintiff, and injured and destroyed, among other things, a quantity of standing corn, and a quantity of corn fodder. The plaintiff also gave evidence tending to show that the close or premises of the said defendants, by them occupied, did not, on any side, lie adjacent to or join the close of the plaintiff, on which the said trespassed were committed. Thereupon the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Pitzner v. ShinnickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Sayles v. BemisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Ward v. Paducah & Memphis R. Co.United States Circuit Court · 1880
- Johnson v. RobinsonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
- East v. CainMichigan Supreme Court · 1882