PROPERTY: a bundle of rights (size of bundle can vary) pertaining to other things and people, the most important rights include the right to exclude, the right to transfer (alienation), and the right to use and possess
I. Discovery and Conquest
A. Basic Rule: First in time, first in right (basically finders keepers rule so the first person to exert possession over a thing owns it)
B. Johnson v. M’Intosh: plaintiff received land from a Native American tribe before M’Intosh received the same land on a grant from the US gov and is in possession at time of cause, court rules that, although Native Americans had right to occupancy (since the land has been given to them by the US gov, ie reservations) but do not have right to title so cannot alienate even though, per first in time first in right rule they should. Court rules that the US take-over of territory of its bounds (conquest) supersedes first in time (per European Rule of Discovery). This case says that “conquest give a title which the courts cannot deny”
i. Rule: Conquest overturns first in time discovery principle
II. Capture
A. Pierson v. Post: Post was original plaintiff and took Pierson to court over a fox and won and then Pierson appealed. Post was pursuing a fox with intent to kill him but Pierson (knowing Post was pursuing the fox) jumped in, killed, and took the fox’ carcass. Issue becomes whether pursuit constitutes ownership of a wild animal or whether actual possession of the carcass is required.
i. Rule: Actual bodily seizure or mortally wounding plus a continued pursuit is necessary to assert ownership of a wild animal.
ii. Dissent argues that a pursuer who is in definite reach of, or has a reasonable prospect of getting, should be able to establish occupancy and stake claim to it and says being able to jump in the way of someone’s kill and taking it is not fair
iii. Certain control over an animal requires one of the following: -bodily seizure- mortal wounding and a continued pursuit-deprivation of the animal’s natural liberty-undertaking the animal into certain control
B. Ghen v. Rich: plaintiff was whale killer and old method of whaling involved spearing the whale with a branded spear and then waiting for the carcass to surface and ID who killed it by the spearhead, defendant found a beached whale that plaintiff had killed but used it and benefited from it’s remains. Court says that actual possession of a carcass is not always required (per custom of practice) but still applies rule from Pierson that whoever kills it owns it and rules for plaintiff.
i. Rule: custom of practice likely encourages utility and should be considered since people who actually do the activity likely know much more about the practicality of it than judges
C. Fugitive resources: are under the control of whoever’s land they are on or under (ie water, gas, oil) as long as they are on/under that person’s land (same rule for wild animals of someone’s property), owned by constructive possession (ie I own it because it’s on land that I own)
D.* Externalities: effects which fall on people other than the actor, for example a tribe owns trees communally and one person cut one down for use- that person just lessened the amount of trees everyone else has but doesn’t realize that because it is external to him and he got a tree so he gained more than he lost personally. Externalities increase with communal ownership and decrease with private ownership
III. Creation
A. Int’l News v AP: AP took INS to court alleging unfair trade for stealing their news stories to run first. Court says that news can only be considered quasi property since it is factual and public domain (so not able to be copyrighted) but recognizes that INS is stealing potential profit from AP so legitimizes unfair trade claim.
i. Rule: Quasi property (like news) can only be protected amongst competitors and not between organizations and the public
B. Cheney Bros. v. Doris Silk Company: plaintiff designs silks seasonally but sells very few and is unable to get them copyrighted because of their fleeting popularity and sales, plaintiff alleges that defendant stole one of its designs and sold it for a lower price and defendant says it didn’t know design was plaintiff’s. Plaintiff tried to apply ruling from INS case but court distinguishes case at bar and says that a man’s physical property goes only as far as his invention and imitation (defendant’s action) is permissible (per common law) and adds that the uniqueness of the INS case makes it only applicable to news (even though plaintiff’ s property here is unable to be copyrighted either).
i. Rule: A man’s intellectual property is limited to the chattels which embody his invention and the INS ruling is very narrow.
C. Abercrombie & Fitch case: A&F took American Eagle to court for mimicking their designs and store set-up and atmosphere alleging that they used the color combos, polos, and cargos first and now AE is copying it and selling it cheaper. Court says that A&F’s allegations are too general because trend is a societal creation and that cheaper alternatives and business competition benefits the public good.
IV. Defending Property Rights and Acquisition by Find
A. Jacques v. Steenberg Homes: defendant had to cross plaintiff’s property to deliver a motor home but plaintiff refused to let them cross through and defendant did it anyway so plaintiff sued and won in trial court with damages and defendant appeals. Court of Appeals affirms ruling but tosses damages.
i. Rule: Reasonable punitive damages can be awarded for intentional trespass because it reinstates an owner’s property right to exclude and punish those who don’t listen.
B. State v. Shack: defendants are members of a government organization (SCOPE) that allows free services to migrant workers. Defendants went o see migrant workers living on
ied and his children sue saying that the girlfriend has no rights to the sperm after Moore case but court does not follow Moore ruling, distinguishing this case because the sperm was removed and saved on decedent’s own accord and willfully left in a testament to the girlfriend.
VI. Adverse Possession
A. Basics: way to acquire title to property (or part of a property) after possessing or occupying it for a said number of years without the consent of the owner and under certain circumstances, determined by a quiet title action; the taking of property is justified because giving to an adverse possessor encourages utility (since real owner isn’t using it), is fair (if the adverse possessor has been occupying for a long time), and creates certainty in the judicial system (the land is always owned by someone); the doctrine protects both a real owner’s right to rule property (until statute of years runs out but court argues that owners should have taken action before years elapsed) as well as an adverse possessor’s interest after the statute of limitations runs out (because they “earned” it by using the land)
i. Claim of title: state of mind of a possessor, whether a possession to the land is believed
ii. Color of title: possession of land from a document (like a will) that is somehow inadequate/defective but appears to be a true holding of title
B. Requirements:
i. actual entry of land: a violation of the owner’s rights, possessor must enter either all or the part of the property to be adversely possessed and utilize it like a usual owner would
ii. exclusive possession: no one should be able to say they’re using the land too
iii. open and notorious: not attempting to hide occupation, neighbors would believe you to be the owner and owner should or could have known about occupation
iv. adverse: cannot be with permission from the owner
v. claim of right/title: regarding the intent of the occupier, can be in good faith (ie you didn’t know it belonged to someone else) or aggressive (ie you purposely attempted to assert title), most courts including CA also use objective standard (ie what the occupier was thinking is irrelevant) but most courts tend to favor good faith possessors
vi. continuous for statutory period: property should be in use by occupier for entirety of statutory period laid out by state law (does not
