TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bickel v. Polk

JOHN A. BICKEL and Others, Appellants vs. CHARLES POLK, Plaintiff Below, Respondent

Bickel v. Polk, 5 Del. 325 (Del. Super. Ct. 1851)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Superior Court of Delaware · State Trial Courts
Decided
July 5, 1851
Judges
Booth
Citations
5 Del. 325
Headnotes
The public have a right of navigation and fishery on all streams where the tide ebbs and flows, even though the ripairian proprietor’s lines cover the place; but they have no right to land fish on private property, above high water mark.
Summary
This was an appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, in an action of trespass, for crossing the plaintiff’s land to the bay shore, and hauling fish up on the same. The plaintiff was in possession of a farm, extending to the Delaware bay, the original lines of which, according to the patent, run beyond where the fast land now extends, the sea having gradually encroached upon the land, and the tide now ebbs and flows where those lines once covered. The defendants hauled their seines in the Delaware bay, in front of Mr. Polk’s property, landed their fish, and sold them or carried them away; and claimed the right to do so as a common right.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Booth

Booth, Chief Justice.

This is an action of trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close; taking and carrying away fish, &c.

The land of Charles Polk by the original patent and survey, extends to the Delaware bay, which has encroached upon the land some seventy perches ; and the question is, whether the defendants are guilty of a trespass for taking fish between high and low water mark, or below that line, but over soil which once belonged to the plaintiff, and which by the encroachments of the sea had become covered with water.

The right of fishing in all public streams where the tide ebbs and flows, is a common right, and the owner of land adjoining tide water, though his title runs to low water mark, has not an exclusive right of fishing ; the public have the right to take fish below high water mark, though upon soil belonging to the individual, and would not be trespassers in so doing; but if they take the fish above high water mark, or carry them above high water mark and land them on private property, this would be a trespass; but the damages would be merely nominal, as for an illegal entry; it being agreed in the argument that there was no other injury. In all navigable rivers,, where the tide ebbs and flows, the people have of common right the privilege of fishing, and of navigation, between high and low water mark; though it be over private soil.

The jury could not agree, and the parties compromised.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1988: 12005: 119882026peak 1988 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Mississippi484 U.S. 469 (1988)
  2. Glass v. Goeckel703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005)

Most recent

  1. Glass v. Goeckel703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005)
  2. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Mississippi484 U.S. 469 (1988)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list