Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

125 Mich. 1

People v. Conrad

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1900

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1900-10-31

<p>Illegal Fishing — Private Ponds.</p> <p>2 Comp. Laws 1897, §§ 5849-5851, declaring it unlawful to spear fisli in any of the inland lakes in this State, do not cover the case of one spearing in a private lake or pond having no connection with other waters, by consent of all the owners, thereof. , ,</p>

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““If it [the lake] were connected with other lakes and streams, so that fish might pass in and out of it, others than the owners would then have an interest in the protection of the fish in the lake.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including People v. Horling

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed, and respondents discharged · Decided 1900-10-31

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 1932

5 state decisions

201900191019201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Respondent Conrad and three others own Hibbard Lake, which contains about 15 acres. It has no inlet or outlet connecting it with other waters. The respondents obtained permission from these owners to spear fish in the lake. Eor this they were arrested and tried, under Act No. 159, Pub. Acts 1891 (sections 5849-5851, 2 Comp. Laws 1897), and upon the trial the court directed the jury to find a verdict of guilty.

¶2Section 1 of the act reads:

“That it shall not be lawful for any person to take, catch, or kill, or attempt to take, catch, or kill, any fish in any of the inland lakes in this State with any kind of spear or graphook, or by the use of jacks or artificial light of any kind, or by the use of set lines or night lines, or any kind of net, or any kind of firearms or explosive, or other device except the hook and line.”

¶3*2This lake is private property. Its owners have entire control over it, and the right to fish in it. The public have no interest in it. If it were connected with other lakes and streams, so that fish might pass in and out of it, others than the owners would then have an interest in the protection of the fish in the lake. This act cannot be construed to include private ponds or lakes, in which the public have no interest.

¶4Judgment reversed, and the respondents discharged.

/125/mich/1 · .json · Public domain