## Facts

- Claude Porter leased agricultural land in Blaine County, Idaho; Croy Creek Road ran through the property.
- Porter subleased about 82 acres south of the road to Jack Maguire for hay and alfalfa; the surrounding fence was in disrepair.
- Porter subleased pasture land north of the road to Sheldon Yanke; the sublease required Yanke to maintain the pasture fence to confine livestock.
- Yanke placed approximately 130 cows, 130 calves, and 8 bulls in the pasture.
- The area was not within a herd district; evidence showed it had historically been treated as enclosed lands.
- Between mid-July and August 2, 1975, Yanke’s cattle repeatedly escaped and entered Maguire’s field.
- On August 2, 1975, about 137 head entered Maguire’s hayfield, damaging baled hay and the growing second crop.
- Maguire sued for $3,818 in actual damages and $10,000 in punitive damages.
- The trial court awarded $3,818 compensatory damages and denied punitive damages for lack of willful conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether a livestock owner is liable for crop damage caused by trespassing cattle when the damaged land is outside a herd district and not enclosed by a statutory “legal fence.”
2. Whether the area should be treated as open range, barring recovery under open-range principles.
3. Whether the evidence supported the finding that the area was historically enclosed lands, imposing a duty to confine cattle.

## Decision

- The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for Maguire.
- The Court upheld the finding that the area was enclosed lands, not open range.
- The Court held Yanke had a duty to confine his cattle based on the character of the area and his fence-maintenance obligation in the sublease, reinforced by the illegality of cattle trespassing on the county road.
- The compensatory damages award was affirmed, and the denial of punitive damages was left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- When land is properly treated as enclosed lands rather than open range, a livestock owner may be liable for damage caused by escaped animals even if the injured land is not within a herd district and is not protected by a statutory “legal fence.”
- A contractual obligation to maintain fences and confine livestock can supply an independent basis for a duty to prevent escape.
- Trial-court findings on whether an area is historically enclosed lands will be upheld on appeal when supported by evidence.
- Punitive damages require willful (or comparable) misconduct; negligence in failing to confine livestock is insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court held that, because the area was enclosed lands and Yanke had an enforceable duty to maintain fencing and confine his cattle, he was liable for the crop damage his escaped cattle caused, notwithstanding the absence of a herd district or a statutory legal fence on the injured property.


Maguire v. Yanke, 590 P.2d 85 (Idaho 1979)