Robert Crosswhite Week 13 Case Study (1)

.docx

School

Central Lakes College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

2130

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by KidHare2488

Summarize the Case in your own words. A few boys found a bottle full of U.S currency in a bottle in the plaintiff's junkyard, they took it and reported it to “someone” (to who is unclear) at some point the owner of the property was informed by either the authorities or the boys themselves. Later he filed a complaint that they allegedly entered his property without permission and took the item. The book is not clear on how it ended rather it just states that “ The trial court’s dismissal of the Plaintiff’s complaint is reversed, and the case is remanded”) Indicate how it relates to the content for the week. This week's course content is all about property, and if it's private or not. But also, ownership, and rights of and to property which goes nicely with this case as the plaintiff is claiming private property, and that the boys entered wrongfully and “stole” something from him. Question 1. What is the actual result in this case? Do the young boys get any of the money that they found? Why or why not? In the end the case was transferred to another court and was not concluded within the information given from this week's case study reading. To my knowledge and understanding of this court case the boys were not granted the money, because it is still on going, and the plaintiff’s dismissed claim was brough back into the light as a potential truth meaning if the plaintiff were to win the case it would not be awarded to the boys Question 2. Who is Dwayne Bishop, and why is he a plaintiff here? Was it Bishop that put the $12,590 in US currency in a bottle in the landfill at the salvage yard? If not, then who did? He was the owner of the salvage yard, and he “filed a complaint "on the claims that they “illegally” entered private property and stole his property (the bottle) (Why didn’t he file trespassing charges???) As far as the story goes, he never stated that he was the one who put the money in the bottle, but claimed ownership since it was on his property. There is not enough information to determine who was the rightful or original owner of the bottle is. Question 3 If Bishop is not the original owner of the currency, what are the rights of the original owner in this case? Did the original owner "lose" the currency? Did the original owner "misplace" the currency? What difference does it make whether the original owner "lost" or "misplaced" the currency? Can the original owner, after viewing the legal advertisement, have a claim superior to Dwayne Bishop's claim? If the original owner was not the bishop, then he must have proof that it was his and would have to bring in hard evidence that he put the money in the bottle and explain how it ended up in the junkyard. If he could prove he was the owner the case would more than likely end there, and he could go home with it. Whether or not he misplaced or lost it is unknown along with who the true owner is, it matters a lot if it were lost then it the people who found it need, to the best of their ability, try to find the owner and return it to him. If it were misplaced, he would have had to put it there in the first place and would now belong to the property owner assuming he does not come back and say something about it.

Provide a conclusion that reiterates the significance of the case. In the end I think that this case is kind of sketchy and I don’t think that the plaintiff is in the right because, one he didn’t know it existed before the boys found it, two he never claimed he was the owner, and three he wouldn’t of known something was missing in the first place until after he was told about it. In the end the case remains unsolved as far as the case study goes, as it switched courts, and it is not clearly stated how it ends. But I think that the kids would win unless the plaintiff can give clear proof that it was really his, also how would you misplace 12,000 dollars and forget about it, or even if he did not forget, why was it in the ground, half buried in your junkyard. Cite: 31.4 Case Bishop v. Ellsworth 91 Ill. App.2d 386, 234 N.E. 2d 50 (1968)

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help