Few legal cases are as enduringly memorable—or as surprisingly entertaining—as Pierson v. Post, 3 Cai. R. 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1805). Though it involves a seemingly trivial dispute between two hunters and a fox, the case has been studied for over two centuries because it poses a fundamental question: When does someone actually gain legal ownership of something unowned, like a wild animal?

This early American case is a cornerstone in property law courses, not just for the rule it announces, but for the dramatic judicial reasoning and the broader philosophical debates it represents.

The Facts

Post was out hunting a fox on an open, unowned stretch of land. He had been pursuing the animal with dogs and horses when Pierson, fully aware of Post’s hunt, stepped in, killed the fox, and took it for himself.

Post sued Pierson for trespass, claiming that since he had been actively pursuing the fox, he had a right to it. Pierson argued that Post didn’t actually own the fox until it was captured—and that he, Pierson, was the one who first took possession by killing it.

The Legal Issue

Does the act of pursuing a wild animal (with intent to capture) give a person a legal property right in it, or does ownership arise only when the animal is actually captured or killed?

The Holding

The court ruled in favor of Pierson.

Legal rule: Mere pursuit of a wild animal does not give the pursuer a property right. Ownership is acquired only through actual capture or mortal wounding of the animal with continued pursuit.

Why Pierson v. Post Is So Important

• Clarifies the First Possession Doctrine

The case teaches the basic property principle that ownership of unowned resources (like wild animals) begins with possession, not mere intention or effort. This “first possession” rule remains influential in disputes involving natural resources, abandoned property, and even cyberspace or intellectual property analogies.

• Shows Competing Theories of Law

The majority opinion relies on formal rules and legal precedent. But the dissent (by Judge Livingston) focuses on fairness, custom among hunters, and practical reasoning. This tension between formalism and realism—between rules and fairness—is a major theme in legal education and judicial philosophy.

• Illustrates the Role of Courts in Defining Property Rights

Pierson v. Post demonstrates that the law not only enforces rights but actively creates and defines them. Property is not a natural fact—it’s a legal conclusion based on policy choices and social expectations.

• Memorable and Fun to Analyze

With its unusual facts, dramatic language, and witty citations (including Roman law and classical philosophers), the case captures students’ attention and encourages lively classroom debate.

Know the Laws with LegalFix

Pierson v. Post may be about a fox, but it’s ultimately a case about rules, fairness, and the foundations of ownership. Law students study it not just to learn about possession, but to understand how the law mediates between competing interests, defines abstract rights, and sometimes chooses clarity over equity. It remains one of the most iconic and thought-provoking cases in the American legal canon.

Whether you want to understand what property law means or are looking for more information on how our legal system works, LegalFix is your go-to source for free legal information. You can find helpful articles and use the free search and information tools to better understand the state and federal laws that affect you. Just visit LegalFix.com to find all this content — and check back often for more valuable legal products and services coming soon.