Legal Opinion

Smith v. Williams

Montana Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1874PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Appeal from First JDisiriet, Jefferson County. The cause was tried before Servís, J. The court erred in saying, in effect, to the jury that it was unnecessary for respondents’ premises to be inclosed to enable respondents to recover. This instruction disregarded the law of the Territory. Cod. Sts. 373, § 1. This requires the premises to be “ inclosed by a lawful fence,” whieh means entirely surrounded by tbe fence, or a similar obstruction.

Read the full summary

Appeal from First JDisiriet, Jefferson County. The cause was tried before Servís, J. The court erred in saying, in effect, to the jury that it was unnecessary for respondents’ premises to be inclosed to enable respondents to recover. This instruction disregarded the law of the Territory. Cod. Sts. 373, § 1. This requires the premises to be “ inclosed by a lawful fence,” whieh means entirely surrounded by tbe fence, or a similar obstruction. Webster’s definition of “inclosed.” The statute defines a lawful fence. Cod. Sts. 476, cb. 25'. Stock owners are not liable for any injury to the crops of…

1Opinion of the Court

"Wade, 0. J.

This was an action in the nature of trespass, brought by plaintiffs against defendant, to recover damages, for that defendant’s cattle broke and entered the farm or inclosure of plaintiff, and destroyed his crop of growing grain.

The statute under which the action was brought is as follows:

Section 1. “If any horse, mule, jack, jenhie, hog, sheep or any kind of neat cattle, shall break into any ground inclosed by a lawful fence, the owner or manager of such animal shall be liable to the owner of such inclosed premises for all damages sustained by such trespass.”

A lawful fence, as…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1805
  2. Bidwell v. WhitakerMichigan Supreme Court · 1850

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Osterholm v. Boston & Montana Con. C. & S. Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Jay v. School District No. 1Montana Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Monroe v. CannonMontana Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Bartsch v. Irvine CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Larson-Murphy v. SteinerMontana Supreme Court · 2000

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API