> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://lawmaxxing.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Session 01 - Acquisition of Property > Acquisition of Property ## I. Acquisition by Discovery ### **Johnson v. M'Intosh** (1823) **Issue:** Who has valid title to land when competing claims exist - one from Native Americans and one from federal land grant? **Facts:** * Plaintiff Johnson inherited land purchased directly from Native Americans * Defendant claimed ownership through a federal land grant from the U.S. Government * Both parties claimed valid legal title **Historical Context:** * Native Americans discovered America first * European settlers (Puritans) came to America seeking religious freedom and to practice conservative Christian values * The Puritan value system became foundational to early American law and culture **Holding/Rationale:** * Native Americans were not practicing Christians * Because they did not believe in or practice Christianity (the foundational value of the nation), they could not own land * **Native Americans could only occupy land, not own it** * Therefore, any purported sale of land by Native Americans was ineffective - they never owned it in the first place * The federal land grant prevailed **Note:** This case is primarily a history lesson and is **not tested**. It provides introduction to property concepts. *** ## II. Acquisition by Capture ### **Pierson v. Post** **Rule:** **Acquisition by capture requires either:** 1. **Mortally wounding** the animal, OR 2. **Trapping/capturing** the animal **Facts:** * Two hunters (Post and Pierson) were hunting a fox on public land * Post was pursuing the fox with hounds * Pierson intercepted and killed the fox instead * Question: Who has rights to the fox? **Analysis:** * Mere pursuit of wild animal does not create property interest * Problems with pursuit theory: * How do you know the fox is running because of one specific hunter? * Multiple hunters could be pursuing same animal * Bears or other animals could also be chasing the fox **Holding:** The hunter who **mortally wounds** or **captures** the fox has the vested property interest. **Important Limitations:** * Hunters must be on **public land** (not trespassers) * Cannot apply trespass and capture rules to private property * Law is **imprecise** - there will be gray areas and factually distinguishable circumstances **Key Takeaway:** If the law was precise, we wouldn't need lawyers. The law is inherently imprecise. *** ### **Ghen v. Rich** (1881) **Facts:** * A whaler killed a fin-back whale using a bomb lance (specialized weapon with identification markings) * The whale sank and washed ashore days later * A finder discovered the whale and sold it to Rich * Rich sold the whale for oil * Ghen sued to recover value of whale, claiming ownership based on the identifying harpoon **Rule:** Under **local custom** and **public policy**, the fisherman who harpooned the whale has the property interest. **Rationale - Local Custom:** * In this whaling community, harpoons had distinguishing marks identifying which company/individual inflicted them * The area offered a **finder's fee** to incentivize return of harpooned whales * This economy depended on whaling **Rationale - Public Policy:** * If finders on beach got 100% interest, the whaling trade would die * Nobody would engage in whaling if there was significant risk the whale would end up on someone else's beach * Logistical difficulty: Retrieving every whale immediately would: * Be physically difficult * Interfere with ability to capture more whales * Whales often sink after being harpooned - fishermen cannot always immediately retrieve them **Distinguishing Factor:** This case relied heavily on **local custom** and **public policy considerations**, making it distinguishable from Pierson v. Post. *** ### **Popov v. Hayashi** (Barry Bonds Baseball Case) **Facts:** * Barry Bonds hit his 73rd home run baseball into the stands * Popov initially caught the ball in his glove * Popov was tackled by crowd, causing him to lose control * Hayashi picked up the ball after it was dislodged * Ball valued at over $1 million initially (sold for $450,000) **Legal Claim:** Popov sued Hayashi for **conversion** (tort - civil wrong involving wrongful exercise of dominion over another's property) **Arguments:** * **Popov's claim:** Had **prepossessory interest** - took significant but incomplete steps to possess the abandoned ball, but for interference of others * **Hayashi's claim:** Had full control by picking up the ball and did nothing wrong **Holding:** Court could not determine who should get the ball - both had legitimate but incomplete claims. **Resolution:** Court ordered the ball be **sold and proceeds split** between both parties. * Each received \$225,000 * Note: Popov's lawyer fees allegedly consumed his share; Hayashi's lawyer worked for less/free **Key Concept:** **Prepossessory interest** - an interest that arises when someone takes significant steps toward possession before being wrongfully interfered with. *** ## III. Acquisition by Find - Lost, Mislaid, and Abandoned Property **This is TESTED material - usually appears as a "throw-in" issue worth approximately 10 points on final exam.** ### Three Categories of Found Property: #### 1. **LOST PROPERTY** **Definition:** Property where the owner **did NOT intend** to place the item where it was found. **Characteristics:** * Typically found on the ground (suggests it fell/was dropped) * Owner did not intentionally place it in that location **Example:** Checkbook found on the floor of a grocery store *** #### 2. **MISLAID PROPERTY** **Definition:** Property where the owner **DID intend** to place the item in that location. **Characteristics:** * Intentionally placed somewhere * Owner forgot to retrieve it **Examples:** * iPhone sitting on a desk in a classroom (resting on surface = intentional placement) * Checkbook on checkout counter at grocery store * Lottery ticket taped to closet wall * Treasure chest buried in sand at beach *** #### 3. **ABANDONED PROPERTY** **Definition:** Property where the owner has **relinquished all interest** in the item. **Characteristics:** * Owner gave up rights to the property * Often found near trash cans or disposal areas * Context suggests intentional abandonment **Example:** Painting resting near a garbage can in a park *** ### Critical Analysis Factors: **When characterizing found property, examine:** 1. **State of the property when found:** * Where was it located? * How was it positioned? * What does the physical state suggest about intent? 2. **Location - Public vs. Private Land:** * **Public land:** Finder may have rights * **Private land:** Generally goes to **landowner/occupier** * **Rationale:** Owner of lost/mislaid property likely to return to location where lost * Makes sense to give to landowner who can return it 3. **Trespasser Rule:** * Law does NOT reward trespassers * Cannot trespass on private property, find something, and claim ownership * Example: Cannot enter someone's home, take items, and claim you "found" them *** ### Exception to Landowner Rule: **There is an exception when the landowner has never been to their own property** (case to be covered in Week 2) *** ### Exam Approach: **Most Important:** Focus on **articulating the characterization** of the property (lost, mislaid, or abandoned). **There is often NO single right answer** - the key is thorough analysis: * You can argue any of the three categories * What matters is how well you articulate your reasoning * Use facts about the **state of the property** to support your conclusion * Avoid "what if" scenarios - analyze based on what you find at the time **Example - Money in Brown Bag in Bathroom:** * Could be lost (fell out accidentally) * Could be mislaid (intentionally placed while using restroom) * Could be abandoned (deliberately left behind) * **Any answer can earn full credit with proper articulation** *** ### Historical Note: **Treasure Trove** **Treasure trove** is a **common law concept** from medieval Europe: * If you found treasure, it belonged to the King or Queen * This concept is **NOT followed today** in the United States * Modern law defaults to lost, mislaid, or abandoned analysis **Note:** You will NEVER need to write "treasure trove" on a final exam. It is included only for historical context. *** ## Key Exam Tips: 1. **First few weeks seem easy** - material gets progressively harder around Thanksgiving 2. **Lost/mislaid/abandoned is a "throw-in" issue** - usually Question 3 or 4, worth \~10 points 3. **Focus on characterization** - the meat of the analysis is properly categorizing the property 4. **Articulation is key** - there's often no single right answer; demonstrate your reasoning 5. **Avoid trespasser scenarios** - remember property rights depend on whether finder had legal right to be there *** **Materials for Next Week:** Continue with subsequent possession (gift and adverse possession)