Evicted woman says deputy marshal let neighbors take her belongings

accessnorthga ^ | 8/23/04 | staff

[CFW]

The Associated Press - COLUMBUS, Ga.

A complaint has been filed accusing a Muscogee County deputy marshal of allowing neighbors to pick through the belongings of a woman who had been evicted.

Virginia Upshaw, 45, says that after being evicted from her three-bedroom trailer, her belongings were hauled outside and placed near the road. Neighbors then took her possessions with the permission of the deputy marshal, she said.

Marshal Kenneth Suddeth, who was not there when Upshaw was evicted, has turned the matter over to Commander Mark Lott, who said he is unable to comment until the investigation is complete.

Upshaw said she did not know the deputy marshal's name. Suddeth and Lott refused to say which deputy was at the scene during the Aug. 16 incident.

Sgt. 1st Class Jay Johnson, who lives at Fort Benning, said he was visiting a friend in the mobile home park and tried to help take Upshaw's belongings to safety. He said he pleaded with Upshaw's neighbors to leave her belongings alone.

"I said, 'You can't take this lady's stuff,' " Johnson said.

Johnson said a deputy marshal stood across the street and watched while items such as furniture, televisions and clothes were taken.

"He said it was OK," Johnson said. "When someone asked the marshal if Ms. Upshaw could call the cops, he said, 'Why? It's free stuff.'... Everybody was saying the marshal said it was OK, and he never disputed that."

A neighbor, who admits taking some of Upshaw's furniture and clothes, backs up the account. But Scarlett O'Hara said she later returned the items.

"The marshal said the stuff belonged to the community," O'Hara said. "We asked if we would get in trouble if we got anything, and he said no... I got two TVs, an entertainment center, a bag of clothes and a big picture. But my heart wouldn't let me keep it. I felt like she was being wronged."

[Modernman]

That's a load of horsesh!t. The property is no more abandoned than a wallet dropped on the street or a bicycle left unlocked in public.

Whether someone abandoned property is based on the test of whether they intentionally gave up ownership. In the wallet example, the property was lost. In the bike example, the owner clearly had no intention of giving up ownership.

When you leave your property behind after being evicted, you are intentionally giving up ownership if you had a chance to remove it pre-eviction.

[monday]

"When you legally evict someone and place their property on the street, the property is considered abandoned. The people who were taking it were committing no crime."

Really? So you help yourself to anything you find on the street? If a car wasn't locked and had the keys in it, would you consider it abandoned as well? What about a bicycle, or motorcycle. Do you also help yourself to furniture and belongings you find on the street while people are moving?

This is a grey area I will admit. Left on the street a couple of hours, probably not abandoned. Left on the street a couple of days, probably abandoned. If you think you can walk up to someone who has just been evicted and take their possessions while they stand there, you are wrong and not a very nice person besides.

[Nov3]

Once the stuffs on the street it is public property. That is the law. As scuzzy as some of these hardnose jerks are here that is the law. I have helped evict a lot of people. It is never nice but I have only felt really sorry for two of them. One we had to call an ambulance to take the lady away. We had to put her stuff on the street because that is the law. The landlord put it in storage after the cops left. The second was 2 students in a three bedroom unit. The third student "took care of the rent". They had their cancelled checks written to the roomate for rent. Didn't matter they had to go. They destroyed every bit of the ripoffs furniture and took his electronics on the street. I was cracking up. Splintered it. One then stayed with their furniture while the other got another unit in his name.

These people if they play the legal system can make it last for months.

I had a slumlord in Knoxville that left us without hot water and heat for over a month because HE didn't pay the utilities. (His responsibility) The bastard tried to get us to pay rent after we had been without heat and hot water for 2 weeks! What gall!!! I can tell you it would have been cheaper to pay the gas bill than fix all the damage we did when we left that place. Don't screw over 3 male college student who live in your property and have time on their hands. It doesn't pay! The other units in the house got similar treatment at the hands of their occupants.

He always bragged about being a deacon in his church. He got to practice forgiveness on that one.

[BearCub]

When you leave your property behind after being evicted, you are intentionally giving up ownership if you had a chance to remove it pre-eviction.

Who is to say she wasn't down the road trying to get her brother in law to bring his truck? I can understand that if the property is unattended for a period of time it might be considered abandoned. This sounds more like the neighbors were circling vultures as the stuff was being unloaded (because the constable was still there). At that point it isn't abandoned. The neighbors are a bunch of pathetic thieves and deserve to have their a$$es kicked or worse.

[cyclotic]

Was a rookie. That was my first and only house for rent. We bought this ghetto home for $2,000. Sold it 2 years later for $3,000 which was probably the only house to sell at a profit in Detroit that year.

You're right though, you need to be almost heartless with these people, (not poor people, but crackheads and welfare cheats) otherwise, they'll wrap you around their fingers and use you up.

[monday]

"When you leave your property behind after being evicted, you are intentionally giving up ownership if you had a chance to remove it pre-eviction."

Have you ever participated in an eviction? Belongings and tenant are evicted simultaneously. Locks are changed and possession of the rental is given to the landlord. The tenant may or may not be present but under no circumstances could it be said that the tenant "intentionally gave up ownership" of their property.

[Pilsner]

The worst legal advice in the world comes from drunks in bars, the second worst legal advice in the world comes from cops. Hey Deputy Dipstick, if the property was anyone's for the taking (under the rule capture applied to wild animals apparently), then why not leave it in the hands of the landlord and just let them take it?

I had a client in a probate once who hired me to secure her children's inheritance. The parents were divorced and the dad died without a Will while the two kids were still minors. 100% of his belongings had been hauled to Mexico by his sister, who took two trips to do it. My client (who had not hired me then) protested, and was told by the local police department: (1) they knew Texas law and (2) it said that a single man's property went to his sister, not his children, and (3) she would be arrested if she either interfered with her former sister in law, or called the police about it again.

We were able to get the dead man's insurance and cash in the bank, but every item of personal property he owned is still in Mexico.

[missyme]

I agree..who knows what type of situation this woman was in,let the landlord and the tenant duke it out in court, the neighbors had no business stealing her items, and the GA cop is a jerk...

[ican'tbelieveit]

Exactly. Everyone who keeps correcting me on landlord/tenant law are missing why I am upset. The neighbors are very sad people; as is the cop. The behavior on the street has nothing to do with the eviction; it has everything to do with poor moral character.

[BearCub]

I had a client in a probate once who hired me to secure her children's inheritance. The parents were divorced and the dad died without a Will while the two kids were still minors. 100% of his belongings had been hauled to Mexico by his sister, who took two trips to do it. My client (who had not hired me then) protested, and was told by the local police department: (1) they knew Texas law and (2) it said that a single man's property went to his sister, not his children, and (3) she would be arrested if she either interfered with her former sister in law, or called the police about it again.

I know you know this, but siblings are fourth in line after a spouse, then children, then parents.

The cops should have been strung up for the unauthorized practice of law.

[monday]

"You're right though, you need to be almost heartless with these people"

Not listening to excuses is not being "heartless".

People are always better off if they know there are real consequences to not meeting their obligations. They will respect you, as well as themselves, more if they understand that. If the obligations are impossible for them to meet, then they need to make other arrangements. The sooner they come to that understanding the better for them also.


Being businesslike in dealing with tenants is not the same as being "heartless".

[Modernman]

Really? So you help yourself to anything you find on the street?

No, clearly.

If a car wasn't locked and had the keys in it, would you consider it abandoned as well?What about a bicycle, or motorcycle. Do you also help yourself to furniture and belongings you find on the street while people are moving?

No. It's all based on the context of the situation.

If you think you can walk up to someone who has just been evicted and take their possessions while they stand there, you are wrong and not a very nice person besides.

I don't think that.

[BearCub]

It's not a crime when stuff is put on the street, it gets reduced to trashpicking. What about the crime when the tenant steals several hundred dollars a month from the landlord?

Abandonment is all about intent. If she didn't intend that the property was abandoned then it wasn't, period - your novel but incorrect legal theories aside.

I can understand the frustration of a landlord who has been bilked out of rent - but that is an issue completely separate of the theft of her belongings.

I am growing much less sympathetic toward the landlords I hear here - sound like a bunch of jerks to me. With attitudes like that, I'd be surprised if you don't get badly hurt someday.

[Chemist_Geek]

In Illinois this isn't the case. If someone has refused to vacate and his possessions are placed outside, they're free for the taking.

Really? Wow. Is that in statute (I doubt it) or some appellate decision?

[Chemist_Geek]

I am growing much less sympathetic toward the landlords I hear here - sound like a bunch of jerks to me. With attitudes like that, I'd be surprised if you don't get badly hurt someday.

I have no doubt but that their tenants have been on the receiving end of their "tender mercies" more than once, prompting some of the so-called "deadbeat" behavior. What goes around does indeed come around.

If I'm doing business with someone - leasing a place - I expect to be treated with respect as a client.

[aruanan]

Really? Wow. Is that in statute (I doubt it) or some appellate decision?

I know from some guys who were informed of this by the officers doing the evicting. They weren't the evicted. They had been called by the evicted to help her move her crap. In addition one of them owns some apartments on the bad side of town and is always having to deal with this matter.

[BearCub]

I know from some guys who were informed of this by the officers doing the evicting.

Haha - there's a good source for knowledge of the law - cops! Are you kidding?

Most cops I've met only have the most minimal grasp of the Penal code and Transportation code. Ask about any other subject and they either don't know or spout complete bullsh!t. And on top of that, it's not enough to know the statutes - you gotta know what the case law says - I guarantee cops aren't up to date on that (except narrow issues that affect them, e.g., traffic stops, search-siezure, etc...).

As I said before, abandonment depends on intent. If I leave a piece of property on someone else's land (e.g., a bike on my neighbor's front yard) I have not abandoned it unless my intention is to not retrieve it later. If I come to retrieve it and they won't give it back to me then they have committed theft.

This is exactly what happens with evicted tenants - their stuff is either in a public place or on someone else's private property - but they haven't abandoned it.

[aruanan]

This is exactly what happens with evicted tenants - their stuff is either in a public place or on someone else's private property - but they haven't abandoned it.

The understanding is that if they haven't removed their stuff from that residence by the eviction date, they have abandoned it there. If they're around to take possession as it's placed on the street, fine. If not, it's still considered abandoned property and, once it's been put on the street, fair game for scavengers.

[BearCub]

The understanding is that if they haven't removed their stuff from that residence by the eviction date, they have abandoned it there. If they're around to take possession as it's placed on the street, fine. If not, it's still considered abandoned property and, once it's been put on the street, fair game for scavengers.

Well good luck. I hope you carry - you'll need it someday, I promise. All it takes is one hotheaded former tenant and whether you are right or wrong will suddenly become very irrelevant.

[aruanan]

Well good luck. I hope you carry - you'll need it someday, I promise. All it takes is one hotheaded former tenant and whether you are right or wrong will suddenly become very irrelevant.

Since I don't scavenge possessions of evicted people, I don't have to worry about this.