Impossible - they're smiling.
Posted on 11/11/2008 12:13:50 PM PST by BenLurkin
A Cleveland woman who ended up in a feud over $182,000 in Depression-era currency found in the walls of her home has filed for bankruptcy.
Amanda Reece's Nov. 5 filing lists liabilities of $1.9 million and assets of $980,000.
A contractor found the stash during a remodeling project in April 2006. He asked for a share but he and Reece couldn't agree on how to split the cash.
She testified in a deposition that she had spent about $14,000 of the money and that $60,000 was stolen from her closet.
Contractor Bob Kitts got about $25,230 but a judge ordered him to split it with the estate of the man who hid the cash during the Depression.
Neither the deposition nor the bankruptcy filing explain what happened to the rest
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
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.
Yeah, and my 99% pure gold Canadian Maple Leafs are worth $50 Canadian.
Plus he gets a night with the wife, only if she's not guilty of course. :O)
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.
...$60,000 was stolen from her closet.
Sure it was.
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.
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.
End of topic!!
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.
I don’t get why the contractor was entitled to a penny
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.
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.
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?
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.
Does that mean that a contractor who finds jewelry or other valuables in my home while working should get a piece?
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).
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.
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.
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!
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.