Footnotes (220)



Legal Fictions in Pierson v. Post

Andrea McDowell

Seton Hall Law School

Michigan Law Review, Vol. 105, 2006

The importance of private property is generally assumed in American law and society. Scholars have sought to explain its primacy using numerous legal doctrines, including natural law, the Lockean principal of a right to the product of one's labor, Law & Economics theories about the incentives created by property ownership, and the importance of bright line rules. The leading case on the necessity of private property, Pierson v. Post (1805), makes all four of these points. This article argues that Pierson has been misunderstood, however. Pierson was in fact a defective torts case which the judges shoe-horned into a property mold using legal fictions and antiquated "facts" about fox hunting. Moreover, they themselves knew their arguments were frivolous. My conclusions undermine several prominent theories about private property that are based on Pierson v. Post.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

Keywords: Pierson v. Post, farae naturae, fox hunting, possession, title, property, coase theorem

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: September 1, 2005  

Suggested Citation

McDowell, Andrea, Legal Fictions in Pierson v. Post. Michigan Law Review, Vol. 105, 2006. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=794667

Contact Information

Andrea McDowell (Contact Author)
Seton Hall Law School ( email )
One Newark Center
Newark, NJ 07102-5210
United States
973-642-8862 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,692
Downloads: 146
Download Rank: 133,612
Footnotes:  220

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.297 seconds