Public law 113 79 states that all land owners shall erect, maintain and repair fences, gates, and posts and erect and maintain gates and posts in a manner that prevents trespass, and that any person or premises located within the limits of the fence shall be entitled to the benefit of the same, and any person or premises located within the limits of a fence of a private owner or private fence shall be liable for damages caused by a trespasser or the trespasser’s invitees.
What? It is not clear if this is what is meant by a fence or “private fence”. The law doesn’t appear to define either term. If it only applies to fences owned by the owner of a property it seems like that would be okay. If the law applies to fences owned by a private person or private fence, then it seems like that would be okay.
For us, it makes sense since this is a private fence. For others it might not make sense. We don’t know. The case law of the state of California seems to indicate that private fences are exempt from this law. Again, it’s unclear.
In addition, it seems that this law only applies to new construction fences. Not to fences that are in some way owned by a private person.
Yeah, we really should have read that article. I don’t think it’ll make any difference, but it will be interesting to see how the law applies to fences that are in some way owned by a private person.
So why does the state of California think private fences are exempt from this law? This kind of fence, for example, might be owned by a private person in California.
The law is called “Public Law No. 113, 79,” and it only applies to new construction fences. The law was passed in 1999, and it was supposed to be up to the state’s Department of Public Works to decide whether a given structure met the law’s definition of a “fence” and whether it needed to be torn down.
The law is very complicated, but there are so many things that need to be done to it. The first part of the law is that a fence must be “permanent” in order to be exempted from the law. The second part is that a fence must be more than 250 feet long. The third part is that a fence must have a “wall” on it, and the fourth part is that the fence has to be made of “wood, iron, or some other material.
The fence that is in the process of being torn down, by the state of Michigan, is a very, very important part of the law. It had been the longest fence on the entire island, and the state wanted to tear it down to make room for the new road and the power station. It was the kind of fence you get on a lot of islands, because it was also the kind of fence that people built in order to keep chickens in.
While the law is quite clear about what is and isn’t allowed on the island, it’s also not as clear about what is prohibited. The fence is actually not allowed for one reason or another, but the state wants to make sure it’s not made out of something that makes it useless to keep chickens.