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.
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).
Thanks. That’s good stuff to know. Although I don’t think I’m ever going to find a treasure trove.
I once found a wedding ring in my old house, built in the 30’s. I would have returned it if I ever knew which previous owner it belonged to or how to get in touch with them.