Saxton v. Bacon
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned by the defendant’s bull in goring and wounding one of the plaintiff^s horses, and goring and killing another.
Read the full summary
Case to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned by the defendant’s bull in goring and wounding one of the plaintiff^s horses, and goring and killing another. The declaration set forth in substance, that the parties owned and occupied adjoining farms in Waltham, and that each being bound to maintain an equal proportion of the division fence between them, they had agreed upon the specific portions which each should keep in repair; that on or about July 25th, 1856, the two horses of the plaintiff passed over the division fence from the plaintiff’s pasture into that of the defendant’s,…
1Opinion of the Court
Redfield, Ch. J.
Before the revised statutes of 1840, the occupier of land was bound to fence against neat cattle, and could *544not impound them, and by parity of reason could not maintain trespass for injuries committed by them, unless all the fences of his inclosure, where the damage was done and which he was bound to maintain, were legal. Horses and sheep were expressly excepted from this provision in regard to legal fences. By the revised statutes, the outward fences of inclosures adjoining the highway, and such as the owner of the cattle is bound to maintain, are excepted in terms.
Adjoining…
2Cited by13 opinions
- McKee v. TrislerIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
- Choquette v. PerraultSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
- Dunn v. Cass Avenue & Fair Grounds Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Wallace v. Wilmington & N. R.Superior Court of Delaware · 1889
- Underhill v. City of ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1864
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.