Dougherty v. Stepp
| Dougherty v. Stepp | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decided 1835 | ||||||
| ||||||
| Holding(s) | ||||||
| Every unauthorised, and therefore unlawful entry, into the close of another, is a trespass. From every illegal entry onto another's land, the law infers some damages, even if only the nominal damages of treading down the grass, herbage, or shrubbery. | ||||||
| Opinion By | ||||||
|
Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371 (N.C. 1835) is a decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court authored by Chief Justice Thomas Ruffin. For at least a century, this case has been used in first-year Torts classes in American law schools to teach students about the tort of trespass upon real property.[1]
Background
Stepp incorrectly believed that certain unenclosed land belonging to Doughterty belonged to him. Stepp therefore entered the unenclosed land with a surveyor and chain carriers, who began surveying the land.[2] Before they had marked any trees or cut any bushes, Dougherty challenged their actions.[3]
Dougherty then brought suit against Stepp for trespass quare clausum fregit.[4] A trial was held in Buncombe before Judge Martin. Judge Martin held that since Stepp, the defendant, had not damaged Dougherty's land in any way, Stepp had not committed a trespass.[5] He therefore directed the jury to find for the defendant.[6]
Dougherty then appealed this ruling to the North Carolina Supreme Court.[7] Dougherty's lawyer argued that every unwarrantable entering on another's real property constituted a trespass, even if the defendant mistakenly believed that the land belonged to him.[8] He also argued that every trespass involves some damage to the property, even if it is only the treading down and bruising of the herbage and shrubbery.[9] Stepp's lawyer did not appear before the North Carolina Supreme Court.[10]
Opinion of the Court
In a per curiam decision authored by Chief Justice Ruffin, the Court granted the plaintiff's appeal.[11] The court found that it was error for the trial court to hold that Stepp's actions did not constitute a trespass.[12] The court held that "every unauthorised, and therefore unlawful entry, into the close of another, is a trespass."[13] From every illegal entry onto another's land, the law infers some damages, even if only the nominal damages of treading down the grass, herbage, or shrubbery.[14]
The court therefore granted the appeal and remanded the case for a new trial.
References
- ^ See, e.g., James Barr Ames and Jeremiah Smith, A Selection of Cases on the Law of Torts (3rd ed., 1910), Vol. 1, pp. 59-60; Richard Epstein, Cases and Materials on Torts (8th ed., 2004), pp. 9-10.
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).
- ^ Dougherty v. Stepp, 18 N.C. 371, 371 (N.C. 1835).