The parties owned adjoining tracts of land. Hertin (P) and others entered the mining company's (D) land, believing it was P's land and cut cordwood, which they then left piled on the bank of a nearby lake. D took possession of the wood and sold it. The facts were not clear whether D was aware that P had cut the wood. P sued in the lower court to recover the value of the labor involved in cutting and piling the wood. The lower court instructed the jury that, if P had innocently cut the wood, then D was liable for the labor costs. The jury found in P's favor, and d appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.