Case Name: William Fisher, Plff. in Err., v. Pennsylvania Company
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1886-01-04
Citations: 1 Sadler 337
Docket Number: 
Parties: William Fisher, Plff. in Err., v. Pennsylvania Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Cases in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; being those cases not designated to be reportedÉ
Volume: 1
Pages: 337–337

Head Matter:
William Fisher, Plff. in Err., v. Pennsylvania Company.
Eence held not a monument or mark defining a boundary.
(Decided January 4, 1886.)
Error to the Common Pleas, No. 2, of Allegheny County to review a judgment for defendant in an action for trespass for removing a fence.
Affirmed.
Barton & Sons for plaintiff in error.
Hampton & Dalzell for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
We discover no error in this record. The land on which the fence stood was properly appropriated by the railroad company, according to law. The fence was not a continuous one to mark any designated boundary. It was merely disconnected portions to prevent cattle from trespassing on the track. It was not in any sense a consentable line to define the boundary between the company and the adjoining owner.
Judgment affirmed.