DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Kanagaroo Kort
  HTML https://kangarookort.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Property
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 16--------------------------------------------------
       McAvoy v. Medina
       By: kangaroo Date: January 26, 2011, 6:12 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FACTS:  The plaintiff found a pocketbook which was lying upon a
       table in the defendant’s barber shop.  The defendant took the
       pocketbook and counted the money, and the plaintiff told him to
       keep it, and if the owner should come to give it back;
       otherwise, to advertise it, which the defendant promised to do.
       Subsequently, the plaintiff made three demands for the money,
       and the defendant never claimed to hold the same till the last
       demand.  It was agreed that an unknown customer placed the
       pocketbook on the table by accident, and that the plaintiff
       found it first.
       PROCEDURAL FACTS:  Judgment ruled that plaintiff could not
       maintain his action.  Verdict was returned for the defendant;
       plaintiff alleged exception.
       -
       ISSUE: Did the plaintiff who found the pocketbook in the
       defendant’s store, have a title to it since the original owner
       could not be located?
       RULES:
       -  The property was not lost because the original owner placed
       it on the table and forgot to take it away.  This does not make
       the property lost, in the sense in which the authorities
       referred to speak of lost property.
       ANALYSIS:
       -
       sense in which a finder has a valid claim to hold the same until
       called for by the true owner.
       -
       voluntarily placed it on the table and merely forgot to take it
       with him when he left.
       -
       -
       care for the safekeeping of the object until the true owner came
       to get it (landowner is in the best position to be able to
       reunited the lost property with its rightful owner)
       If you CAN’T conclude that property is Mislaid then it is Lost…
       ABANDONED: IF PROPERTY IS ABANDONED, THE FINDER GETS A PARAMOUNT
       TITLE…B/C THEY ARE THE 1ST FINDER AFTER IT HAS BEEN ABANDONED
       -
       MISLAID: LANDOWNER GETS A POSSESSORY TITLE:  GOOD AGAINST THE
       WORLD EXCEPT AGAINST THE TRUE OWNER
       -
       LOST:  FINDER GETS A POSSESSORY TITLE:  GOOD AGAINST THE WORLD
       EXCEPT AGAINST THE TRUE OWNER
       -  NO INTENT AT ALL
       Common Law Treasure Trove (GB)almost NEVER applicable in
       the United States
       -
       timeburied objects that are gold/silver, plate/coin, or
       some other art objects that are gold or sliver…buried in the
       ground with some evidence that the true owner hid them on
       purpose with the intent to someday come back and get it.
       -
       -
       trove doctrine; Britain now broadens it to include any cultural
       property and narrows it in that the king gets the 1st right to
       buy it at market value.
       Statutory Answer for Finding Issues
       -
       -
       (1)
       (2)
       (3)
       -
       police
       (1)
       -
       (1)
       (2)
       (3)
       -
       (1)
       (2)
       -
       (1)
       (2)
       (3)
       -
       (1)
       (2)
       CONCLUSION:  The plaintiff acquired no original right to the
       property.  Exceptions overruled.
       *****************************************************