Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ohio homeowner who found money in walls bankrupt
yahoo ^ | Mon Nov 10, 4:21 pm ET

Posted on 11/11/2008 12:13:50 PM PST by BenLurkin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last
To: Publius Valerius
If these two would have kept their mouths shut and just divided the money instead of posing for pictures and getting on the news, they both would have had a lot more money to spend.

Even if she had done the smart thing and piad the contractor a small finder's fee before immediately putting it in a safety deposit box and then never discussing it with anyone except her tax attorney - it looks like she still had $1.9 million in debts.

Say the $186,000 consisted entirely of collectable-quality 1000 dollar bills and she sold them on the collector's market: it would only have amounted to a third of her total debt.

Clearly she hadn't been managing her affairs well before this.

21 posted on 11/11/2008 12:28:51 PM PST by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Yeah, and my 99% pure gold Canadian Maple Leafs are worth $50 Canadian.


22 posted on 11/11/2008 12:29:01 PM PST by MeanWestTexan (A Jew voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: KJC1
So if a plumber pulls your wedding ring out of the sink drain, he gets a percent of the value of the ring?

Plus he gets a night with the wife, only if she's not guilty of course. :O)

23 posted on 11/11/2008 12:29:37 PM PST by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Nah, she should have kept her mouth shut, declared bankruptcy, pretended not to have the notes (no one knew) and had a clean slate with about $300K in the bank.


24 posted on 11/11/2008 12:30:27 PM PST by MeanWestTexan (A Jew voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
...$60,000 was stolen from her closet.

Sure it was.

25 posted on 11/11/2008 12:33:51 PM PST by snarks_when_bored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I still care
that’s almost like abandoning it.

When it comes to found property, the law takes four approaches: property is either lost, mislaid, abandoned, or a treasure trove. How the property is characterized will affect who is the rightful possessor and rightful owner.

Lost property is property that is found in a place where it is unlikely to have been deliberately placed. For instance, if I found a $100 bill on the ground in the parking lot, it should be considered lost because the true owner almost certainly didn't intend to place it there.

Mislaid property is property found in such a place where it appears likely that the true owner intentionally placed it but forgot to pick it up. A wallet on a shop counter is mislaid property.

Abandoned property is property found in such a way that it is clear the true owner had no intention of returning for it or reclaiming it. A car that is left on the side of the road for an extended period of time might be abandoned property.

A treasure trove is a stash of gold or silver (or something that represents gold or silver, like paper money), that is deliberately hidden by its true owner.

This money is clearly a treasure trove. In most places (though I don't know the Ohio rules), the finder, not the property owner, is entitled to possession and ownership. This is what the fight was about.

26 posted on 11/11/2008 12:35:17 PM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Idiots. They could have split the loot 50/50, sold it to an antique currency dealer, and probably made $200,000+ each. They both got what they deserved.


27 posted on 11/11/2008 12:35:34 PM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freebilly
Stupid is as stupid does....

End of topic!!

28 posted on 11/11/2008 12:39:08 PM PST by org.whodat ( "the Whipped Dog Party" , what was formally the republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius
It seems most equitable that the money should belong to his heirs.

What if there were multiple owners or multiple tenants? What if the hidden money was originally stolen from an enterprise that no longer exists and has no successors or assigns? Or if it is the proceeds from bootlegging or other criminal activities?

It's very difficult to prove that the money was put there by any specific person and whether the concealer, and therefore his estate, had a right to it.

There is also a common law tradition regarding possession.

the treasure trove belongs to the finder, not the property owner

Inside one's own home?

If we invited a couple over for dinner and the wife noticed that a yardsale end table buried under a bunch of tarps and tools in my garage was, unbeknownst to me, an incredibly rare antique that could fetch hundreds of thousands of dollars - could she just grab up the end table, run out to the driveway, and put it in her trunk and drive away with it?

That seems highly suspect.

29 posted on 11/11/2008 12:39:18 PM PST by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: library user
They both look like they’re married already anyway.
Impossible - they're smiling.

30 posted on 11/11/2008 12:44:10 PM PST by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I don’t get why the contractor was entitled to a penny


31 posted on 11/11/2008 12:44:26 PM PST by RDTF (BO smells and eventually people do what's necessary to avoid it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius
Again, under the common law, the treasure trove belongs to the finder, not the property owner.

I'm not sure this would belong to the finder under any theory of law. In England a treasure trove only went to the finders if it was clearly abandoned, otherwise it went to the king. This property wasn't really abandoned (so you're correct that it should probably go to the estate of the person who originally hid it), but between the finder and the homeowner, I think the clear trend in America is to award it to the homeowner since the contractor was simply an agent of the homeowner.

32 posted on 11/11/2008 12:46:08 PM PST by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
It's very difficult to prove that the money was put there by any specific person and whether the concealer, and therefore his estate, had a right to it.

It would certainly be the burden of the heirs to demonstrate that they were the true owners. But if the heirs can make that demonstration, then I'm OK with them getting the money.

If we invited a couple over for dinner and the wife noticed that a yardsale end table buried under a bunch of tarps and tools in my garage was, unbeknownst to me, an incredibly rare antique that could fetch hundreds of thousands of dollars - could she just grab up the end table, run out to the driveway, and put it in her trunk and drive away with it?

No, because that property wouldn't be lost, mislaid, abandoned, or a treasure trove. Let's say, though, that you invited the couple over to your house and they were out walking in your backyard and, while walking, found a diamond engagement ring that did not belong to you or your wife. Under common law, your guests would be entitled to possession of the ring against the world but for the true owner.

The general rules are the lost, abandoned, and treasure trove property belong to the finder unless the true owner reappears. Mislaid property belongs to the property owner unless the true owner reappears.

33 posted on 11/11/2008 12:46:09 PM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
I think the clear trend in America is to award it to the homeowner since the contractor was simply an agent of the homeowner.

You may be right about the general trend, but at least at common law, it seems like it should belong to the contractor.

I wonder if there is anyone in the house who has knowledge of archaic Ohio property law?

34 posted on 11/11/2008 12:47:54 PM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
I think the clear trend in America is to award it to the homeowner since the contractor was simply an agent of the homeowner.

You raise an interesting argument about agency that I hadn't considered. Good point. I'm not sure I'm totally on board with what you're saying, but I'm beginning to second-guess.

35 posted on 11/11/2008 12:49:47 PM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Does that mean that a contractor who finds jewelry or other valuables in my home while working should get a piece?


36 posted on 11/11/2008 12:52:07 PM PST by JoeThePainter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius

Hmmm just out of curiousity, can one put in a contract to buy property that you are also purchasing any “treasure trove” later discovered? (I’m not planning to do that, but I wonder if it’s possible—like you can buy property with or without mineral rights).


37 posted on 11/11/2008 12:55:40 PM PST by brytlea (You can fool enough of the people enough of the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius

It seems like the lesson is, to be on the safe side, if someone finds a “treasure” on your property to simply say, “So THAT’S where it’s been! I thought I’d never find it!” LOL.


38 posted on 11/11/2008 12:56:42 PM PST by KJC1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

It might be hard to sell that many bills in the collector’s market without attracting a little attention. No guarantee that creditors or the government would have discovered it, but not the smartest thing to risk. Anyone who was upset with her for any reason could have tipped them off, and she would have faced jail time.


39 posted on 11/11/2008 1:00:04 PM PST by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: travlnmn41

DUH! If I ever won the lottery, I would move the day after and put it all in the bank, not hoard it away at a known address! What a moron!


40 posted on 11/11/2008 1:02:46 PM PST by 50sDad (OBAMA: In your heart you know he's Wright.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson