Property – Dean King
Acquisition by Capture
Pierson v Post
P in pursuit of fox/D aware, killed fox
àMust have actual possession of wild animal to obtain property right in it (First in time, first in right)
certainty-reduces litigation, promote peace and order
Minority view- 1) don’t want to deter fox hunting 2)reward labor & investment
policy-promotes social welfare
Popov v Hayashi (Bonds HR Ball)
P caught, knocked down. D picked it up.
Dàhad possession w/complete control
Pàhad a pre-possessory interest (took significant but incomplete steps)
àboth have good arguments, sell and split money
Acquisition by Find
Classifications of Found Property
Abandoned (finder, always) – intentionally relinquished by O
Lost (finder) – unintentionally parted with by O
Mislaid (property owner) – intentionally placed by O, then O forgets
Treasure Trove (finder) – money, so old O is probably dead
Goals: 1) return to true owner 2) if not, then reward finder
Favorite v Miller
Does finder or land owner have right to artifact?
àD was a trespasser, loses.
Benjamin v Linder Aviation
Money found in wing of plane.
(bank owns plane, housed at hangar, found by mechanic employed by hangar)
Mislaidàbank gets money
Acquisition by Discovery
Johnson v McIntosh (might makes right)
Title from sovereign vs title from Indians
Indians first possessor, Indians labor/investment
àRight of the discoverer to appropriate lands
1) to determine “better” title, trace back to sovereign 2) ruling against govt would create chaos
White v Samsung
D ran ads using P’s robot likeness
Right of publicity:
1-D’s use of P’s identity
2-P’s name/likeness used to D’s advantage
3-w/o P’s consent
4-resulting in inury
àBlond robot not P’s name or likeness, but evoked P’s identity.
Davis v Davis
Who gets custody of frozen embryos? (Mrs – donate/Mr – discard)
àbalance the reasons of each side. Here, Mr’s are stronger, so he wins.
Porter v Wertz (painting)
Can’t convey better title than he has.
Possession Leading to Title
Tapscott v Cobbs
P can only recover on his own valid title.
3rd party w/out title cannot get land by questioning title of previous possessor
àPrior possessor wins over subsequent possessor, unless subs possessor can prove better title.
Adverse Possession
Acquires AP of land when takes possession and S.O.L. on true owners cause of action has run
Possession must be:
1) Actual – how reasonable owner would use land
2) open & notorious – put an ordinary person on notice of claim
3) exclusive – nobody else uses
4) continuous – more than occasional
5) hostile & under a claim of right – intent to claim land as own
Gives possessor best title.
Jarvis v GillespieP acquired title quitclaim from town, but title had already passed from town to adverse possessor.
Ran through steps of adverse possession, adverse possessor was right.
Manillo v Gorski
Question on hostility?
Connecticut doctrine (objective) – Did he treat as his own?
Maine doctrine (subjective) – Ask if he intended to possess
Court adopted CT Doctrine
Carpenter v Ruperto (Iowa doctrine)
Intent is irrelevant, must have good fai
then to b’s children
B’s alive – subj to partial divestment
B dies – absolutely vested
Class closes – biologically (A’s children, and A dies) or by “rule of convenience” (to A’s living children when transfer is to be made, and no yet-to-be-born children are considered).
In re estate of Houston
Grandchild w/vested remainder who dies cannot lose their share (passes to GC’s estate)
Rule against Perpetuities
Interest is only valid if there was a “measuring life” alive at the creation of the interest.
Applies to àcontingent remainders, vested subj to partial divestment, executory interests
Notàabsolutely vested, vested subj to complete divestment
Ex1 – O to A for life, then to A’s 1st child to reach 21 (contingent remainder)
OKàuse A as measuring life. A will either die childless or his child will reach 21 within 21 years of his death
Ex2 – O to A for life, then to A’s 1st child to reach 25 (contingent remainder)
No good àA could die when the child is less than 4, more than 21 yrs away from being 25.
Even if child is 24 at the time of the grant, still no good.
Ex3 – (unborn widow) O to Son for life, then son’s widow for life, then surviving issue in FS
Sonàpresent estate, RAP n/a
Widowàcontingent remainder, RAP applies
