Volume 34, Issue 2 pp. 301-336

Pierson v. Post: A Great Debate, James Kent, and the Project of Building a Learned Law for New York State

Angela Fernandez

Corresponding Author

Angela Fernandez

Faculty of Law, University of Toronto

Angela Fernandez is assistant professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto ([email protected]).Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 May 2009
Citations: 5

Earlier versions of this article were presented at Law and Society in Baltimore, MD (July 2006); the Legal History Group, University of Toronto (March 2006, January 2007); and the Stanford-Yale Junior Faculty Forum in Palo Alto, CA (May 2007). Junior Faculty forum funds were provided by that conference. All other research and travel support came from the University of Toronto; specifically, a Connaught Start-Up Award, SIG grants, and a Summer Student Assistantship Grant, which funded the salary of my research assistant, Alex Zavaglia. Additional funding was provided by the Office of the Dean, Mayo Moran, University of Toronto. Thanks to Helen Weltin, New York State Library, Albany, NY, and Whitney Bagnell, Columbia University, New York. Acknowledgment is also owed to Stephen Waddams, Darlene Johnston, Andrea McDowell, Bethany Berger, Debora Threedy, Robert Gordon, Dirk Hartog, Blaine Baker, Lisa Austin, Denise Réaume, Karen Knop, Michael Marrus, Philip Girard, Donald Roper, Henry Smith, Mark Kelman, and Jed Shugerman.

Abstract

Pierson v. Post (1805) has long puzzled legal teachers and scholars. This article argues that the appellate report was the product of the intellectual interests (and schooling) of the lawyers and judges involved in the case. They converted a minor dispute about a fox into a major argument in order to argue from Roman and other civil law sources on how to establish possession in wild animals, effectively crafting an opportunity to create new law for New York State. This article explores the possibility that the mastermind behind this case was the chief justice of the court at the time, James Kent. The question of Kent's involvement in 1805 remains elusive. However, the article uses annotations he made on his copy of the case and discussion of Pierson v. Post in his famous Commentaries to demonstrate the nature of his later interest and to explore the project of building a learned law for New York State.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.