""The Mint's lawless position is that by merely claiming the coins were somehow removed from the Mint unlawfully in the 1930s, they can take the Langbords' property without proving it in a court of law," Berke said."
They didn't take the property, the lady gave them the property. What a dimwitted move. The rule is that one who possesses property has a better right to it than anyone, other than the TRUE owner. When there is a question as to who the TRUE owner is, the possessor is in the best position.
If I claim that I own something, and the person that I have the claim against actually hands the property over to me, you bet your sweet bippy I am not going to give it back. I'll let THEM prove in a court of law that they have a better right to it than than I do. Which I think is going to be her burden to do, as it seems that the PRESUMPTION ought to be that they were obtained from the government illegally.
I'm not so sure that the statute of limitations is going to help the lady. For one thing, statutes of limitations on stolen property may toll [become suspended] when property has been stolen and then concealed.
Also, the statute of limitations is a limitation on the right to sue, or prosecute. It does not mean that when the statutory period ends, "Presto" the true owner of the property changes. It just means that the true owner cannot use the courts as a means to recover the property. If there was a statute of limitations and it ran, all it did was prevent the government from suing for return of the coins, or prosecuting for theft. But now that the government has the coins, they don't have to sue. In other words, the lady could use the statute of limitations as a "shield" to prevent the government from taking the coins away from her, but not as a "sword" to force the government to return them.
I don't see any constitutional issue here, or any other reason why this should get to the Supreme Court
I bought some real estate in North Carolina and my attorney pointed out that it is a "race state". He quickly went on to state that it's a race to the Court House to get the sale recorded.
It is now more of a formality, but the attorney did represent a client who won a signed contract to only find out the next day that the same contract was awarded to another company. The attorney's advice - race to the court house and get it recorded. The client got it recorded first and the second company was "down the river without a paddle".
The lady loaned the mint the property. It is clear that the lady expected the mint to return them and the mint clearly lead her to believe that they would be returned.