Property Law – Wright Spring 2016
I. Overview
Property is the law governing the relations and duties of private individuals with regard to control over things
1. In order to go into court, you must have a property right to have a property right, you need a source of law
Capture, possession, occupancy, labor, inheritance, purchase
2. You cannot transfer what you do not own, but you can alienate what you do not own
7 Overarching Rule of Property:
Rule Against Unreasonable Restraints on Alienation
Rule Against Unreasonable Restraints on Marriage
Rule Against Unreasonable Restraints on Competition
Rule Against Unreasonable Restraints Based on Race
Rule Against Perpetuities
Rule Against Waster
Rule Against Creation of New Estates
Property: rights among people that concern things
Legal Positivism: rights, including property rights, only arise through government
Natural Law Theory: rights arise in nature as a matter of fundamental justice, independent of government
Scope of Property Rights:
Property rights are inherently limited
They exist only to the extent that they serve a socially-acceptable justification
Value in granting broad decision-making authority to the owner
Property as a “Bundle of Rights”:
Right to exclude
Right to transfer
Right to possess & use
Right to destroy
Can also be defined in terms of time and by person
Right to Exclude
NOT ABSOLUTE
Right to exclude others from the use or occupancy of the particular “thing”
Police power, emergency situations, medical or legal exceptions
Right to Transfer
Right to transfer the holder’s property rights to others
Limits: cannot for avoiding creditors claims, based on race, color, national origin, religion or gender
: property that CANNOT be transferred; examples include human body or tissue
Right to Possess & Use
Subject to statutes, ordinances and other laws that restrict use
Historically: (a) the use was not a nuisance, and (b) no other person held an interest in the land
Right to Destroy
In general, the law is reluctant to interfere with an owner’s freedom to abuse, or even destroy, her property
TREND toward limiting right to destroy
Real Property: rights in land
Consists of anything attached to the land
Buildings, signs, fences or trees
Includes certain rights in the land surface, subsurface (including minerals & groundwater), and the airspace above the surface
Personal Property: rights in things other than land
Chattels: items of tangible, visible personal property
Jewelry, livestock, airplanes, coins, rings, cars, and books
Intangibles: stocks, bonds, patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, debts, franchises, licenses, and other contract rights
II. Theories of Property Ownership
No Property – no one has any rights in the parcel
Common Property – every person holds equal rights in the land
State Property – the state owns all the rights in the land
Private Property – one or more persons hold rights in the land
First Possession Theory: the first person to take occupancy or possession of something owns it
Explains how rights of private property arise in unowned resources
Labor-Desert Theory: people are entitled to the property that is produced by their labor
Explains how unowned natural resources are transformed into private property owned by one person
Every person owns his body;
Thus, each person owns the labor that his body performs;
so, when a person labors to change something in nature for his benefit, he mixes his labor with the thing; and
by this mixing process, he thereby acquires rights in the thing
Utilitarianism Theory: (traditional) private property exists in order to maximize the overall happiness or “utility” of all citizens
property rights are allocated and defined in the manner that bests promotes the general welfare of society
Law & Economics Utilitarian Theory: assumes happiness may be measured by dollars; private property exists in order to maximize the overall wealth of society
: rights to the exclusive use of valuable resources
: economic costs or benefits caused by a person’s failure to consider the full impacts of his use or resources
Elements of Theory
Universality: all property is owned by someone
Exclusivity: the law recognizes the absolute right of an owner to exclude all members of society from the use or enjoyment of the owned resource
Transferability: property rights are freely transferable, so that a resource can be devoted to the most highly-valuable use
Liberty or Civic Republican Theory: ownership of private property is necessary for democratic self-government
Personhood Theory: justifies private property as essential to the full development of the individual; certain things – like a wedding ring – are seen as so closely connected to a person’s emotional and psychological well-being that they virtually become part of that person
III. Creation of Property Rights
Acquisition of Property Rights
Hierarchy of Possession
Right to Possession
Actual Possession
A. Occupancy Property Rights in Wild Animals
Pierson v. Post: Mortal Wounding – Fox Hunt
Facts: On unowned land, Post unsuccessfully hunted a fox for a few hours; then Pierson, knowing Post was in pursuit, killed the fox and took possession
Issue: What acts amount to occupancy?
Rules: Property rights in a wild animal are acquired by OCCUPANCY – pursuit alone is NOT ENOUGH
To establish property rights through occupancy, corporal possession is necessary (not strictly necessary) – you need to put the world “on notice”
WRIGHT – Mortal wounding (enough to put the world on notice) along with continued pursuit and the reasonable likelihood of success can substitute for corporal possession
Notes:
Property rights are acquired by occupancy
Traditional Rule: Occupancy = actual corporal possession
Modern Rule: Pursuit alone ≠ occupancy
Pursuit alone with mortal wounding & continued pursuit = occupancy (court held this)
Could also be argued that pursuit alone with control over natural liberty = occupancy
Alternative arguments
People within the industry should be setting the rules
Should encourage socially useful behavior
Continued pursuit, intent, reasonable likelihood of possession = occupancy
Mortal wounding puts a notice on an animal that someone else is in pursuit and likely to catch
Social implications of dissenting rule
Can price people out of the competition (not everyone can have hounds)
Pierson argument: killing or other actual capture of the animal constituted possession
Post argument: probable capture st
in the land belong to the landowner, and objects found on the land surface should be awarded to the finder
Statutes Defining the Rights of Finders:
Statutes governing “found” property usually supersede the CL
Either expressly or implicitly, statutes abolish the distinctions between lost, mislaid, and treasure trove
Replace CL doctrines with clear rule – FINDER WINS
C. Causes of Action for Possession
(Tort of) Conversion
Essentially is acting like an owner when you’re not
Exercising property rights over something that is not yours
Trespass to Chattel
Where personal property has been damaged or where the D has interfered with p’s use of property
Novel Disseisin (quiet title)
Claiming that something belongs to you but someone else believes it belongs to them
Quiet title decides who a thing actually belongs to
No wrong has been done
Injunctive Relief
Court order for something to be done to relieve issue
Constructive trust
When a person has title to property and/or takes possession of it under circumstances in which he/she is holding it for another, even though there is no formal trust document or agreement
D. Conversion
Popov v. Hayashi: Interrupted Possession of Abandoned Property – Possession & Capture
Facts: Popov started to grab the ball when he was attacked; then Hayashi emerged with the ball
Issue: Whether Popov had possession or if possession was actually in Hayashi, the final ball holder
Rules: WRIGHT – the Ball was ABANDONED by the MLB and therefore the ball was available to be retaken by a finder with the intent and ability to reduce it to possession
Court found that the process of reducing it to possession was interrupted and therefore applied equitable remedy
Possession = physical control + intent (instantaneous) to achieve control
Equitable Division = treat property like owners have equal ownership that hasn’t yet been divided
Conversion is the wrongful exercise of dominion over the personal property of another
There must be actual interference with the plaintiff’s dominion
Wrongful withholding of property can constitute actual interference even where the D lawfully acquired the property
Act must be intentionally done
Wrongful purpose is not a component
Don’t have to know the property is someone else’s when you take it for tort of conversion
Hayashi intended to pick up the ball but didn’t intend to dispossess someone of it
Two arguments in Popov
Possession requires both control & intent to control
Control = stopping forward momentum but not complete control
Possession requires intent to control + complete control
Court held this
