Fox v. Beebe
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action, brought upon the statute, entitled “An act concerning fences arid common fields,” to recover double the expense of repairing the defendant’s part of the divisional fence, between their adjoining lands, incurred by the plaintiff in pursuance of the provisions of the statute. The material parts of the statute, upon which the action is founded, are the following.
Read the full summary
This was an action, brought upon the statute, entitled “An act concerning fences arid common fields,” to recover double the expense of repairing the defendant’s part of the divisional fence, between their adjoining lands, incurred by the plaintiff in pursuance of the provisions of the statute. The material parts of the statute, upon which the action is founded, are the following. See. 1. “ That the proprietors of lands shall make and maintain sufficient fence or fences, to secure their particular fields and enclosures; and a rail fence, four feet and an half high, a stone wall, four feet…
1Opinion of the CourtWaite, C. J.
The statute undoubtedly contemplated a summary proceeding, in determining questions respecting the sufficiency of fences, and the mode of compelling the necessary repairs.
It prescribes what, in certain cases, shall be sufficient fences. A rail fence, four and a half feet high, a stone-wall, four feet high, well and substantially erected, or any other fence, which, in the judgment of the fence-viewers, shall be equal to such rail fence, shall be deemed a lawful fence.
When the fence-viewers are called upon to examine a fence, if it be a rail-fence, or a stone-wall, they have but to *277measure the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Guyer v. StrattonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Edgerton v. MooreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
- Hartshorn v. SchoffSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1871