72 CIVIL TIMBER TRESPASS 



ancy, l or against the tenant himself fo 1 * a taking after the 

 severance, 2 at least if the taking is at another time from 

 the severance. 3 A tenant cannot maintain an action for 

 the carrying away of severed trees. 4 



72 The Taking of Timber after the Expiration of 

 the time Limited for Removal. One who reserves 

 growing trees in a grant of land, or purchases such trees, 

 with provision for removal within a limited time ordinarily 

 becomes a trespasser if he enters and removes either stand- 

 ing or severed trees after the expiration of the limited time, 5 

 even though the removal within the limited time was pre- 

 vented by the plaintiff. 6 While some courts hold that he 

 still has title and that no damages can be recovered for 

 the value of the timber, 7 others hold that all interest in 

 the timber is lost and full damages can be recovered 8 

 If there be an agreement that upon severance the trees 

 shall become the property of the one severing, the latter 

 or his assignee may maintain an action of de bonis aspor- 

 tatis against one who appropriates the severed trees 9 

 even though the offender be the land owner. 10 However 

 if some act subsequent to the cutting such as payment 

 therefor, is necessary before title shall vest in the severed 

 trees as chattels, the action cannot be maintained prior to 

 the accomplishment of such act, n except where the terms 

 of the agreement were such as to give the one severing them 

 possession in the form of a hen. 12 



1. Lane v. Thompson, 43 N. H. 320. 



2. Chestnut v. Day, 6 U. C. Q. B. O. S. 637; Warren County v. Gans, 80 Miss. 76, 31 



So. 539. 



3. Bulkley v. Dolbeare, 7 Conn. 232; Schermerhorn v. Buell, 4 Den. (N. Y.) 422. 



4. Zimmerman Mfg. Co. v. Damn, 149 Ala. 380, 42 So. 858, 123 Am. St. Rep. 58, 9 



L. R. A. N. S. 663; Cf. Matthews v. Bennett, 20 N. H. 21. 



5. Howard v. Lincoln, 13 Me. 122; Pease v. Gibson, 6 Me. 51; Bunch v. Eliz. City 



Lbr. Co., 134 N. C. 116, 46 S. E. 24. 



6. Inderlied v. Whaley, 65 Hun. (N. Y.) 407, 20 N. Y. Suppl. 183. 



7. Zimmerman Mfg. Co. v. Damn, 149 Ala. 380, 42 So. 858, 123 Am. St. Rep. 58,9 



L. R. A. 663; Dyer v. Hartshorn, 73 N. H. 509, 63 Atl. 231; Hoit v. Stratton 

 Mills, 54 N. H. 109, 20 Am. Rep. 119; Plumer v. Prescott, 43 N. H. 277. 



8. Morgan v. Perkins, 94 Ga. 353, 21 S. E. 574; Bunch v. Eliz. City Lbr. Co., 134 N. C. 



116, 46 S. E. 24; Boults v. Mitchell, 15 Pa. St. 371; See Clark v. Guest, 54 Ohio 

 St. 298. 



9. Flske v. Small, 25 Me. 453. 



10. Hamilton v. McDonnell, 5 U. C. Q. B. 720. 



11. Creps v. Dunham, 69 Pa. St. 456; Cf. Goodwin v. Fall, 102 Me. 353, 66 Atl. 727. 



12. Haverly v. State Line etc. R. Co., 125 Pa. St. 116, 17 Atl. 224. 



Cf. McAllister v. Walker, 69 Mo. App. 496 (1897) (Clearing of land paid for from 

 timber cut in clearing.) 



