|
''Thomas Haslem v. William A. Lockwood'',〔Halsem v. Lockwood, 37 (Conn.) 500, 1871〕 Connecticut, (1871) is an important United States case in property, tort, conversion, trover and nuisance law. The plaintiff directed his servants to rake abandoned horse manure into heaps that had accumulated in a public street, intending to carry it away the next day. Before he could do so, the defendant, who had no knowledge of the plaintiff's actions, found the heaps and hauled them off to his own land. The plaintiff sued the defendant in trover demanding payment for the price of the manure. The trial court held for the defendant, stating he owed nothing to the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed and the Appellate Court of Connecticut held for the plaintiff, remanding the case for a new trial. The manure originally belonged to the owners of the horses that dropped it. But when the owners abandoned it on the road, it became the property of the man who was first to claim it. The Court found that the best owner after the act of abandonment was the borough of Stamford, Connecticut where the manure was found. In the absence of a claim to the manure by the officials of Stamford, the plaintiff was entitled to it by reason of trover. The plaintiff was entitled to damages because the defendant had committed a conversion. The manure had not become a part of the real estate, as the defendant had argued. It remained separate and unattached to the land, and hence was not part of the fee of estate. Comparing manure to seaweed and laws in the 19th century having to do with the scraping into piles of natural things of this sort, the court held that 24 hours was a reasonable time for the defendant to wait to take the manure. That by this standard, and the fruits of his labour of raking into piles, the plaintiff was granted a new trial over the issue of damages. ==Issues== # Is manure abandoned on a road by passing horses property subject to the laws of trover? # Does manure abandoned on the road by passing horses become a part of the land, and in essence attached to it as part of the ''fee of ownership''? # Does a person who gathers the manure into heaps ''improve it'', and hence have claim to ownership? # Does a third party who happens by and takes as his own the manure which has been placed in heaps by another commit a conversion? # If the third party is guilty of committing a conversion, what are the ''damages'' to the plaintiff? 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Haslem v. Lockwood」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|