personal property Flashcards Preview

Bar Exam > personal property > Flashcards

Flashcards in personal property Deck (21):

abandoned property

has the property been abandoned?
did one give up possession coupled with the intent to give up title
if so, has one acquired rights in the property?
possession coupled with the intent to acquire rights


lost or misplaced property

the true owner has superior rights to the property but usually the question is between the finder and the owner of the land it was found on
Lost: you accidentally or involuntarily lose the property, the finder will prevails unless trespassing or in a highly private locus
misplaced: you voluntarily place it somewhere and then forget to take it with you, the owner of the property will prevail with no exceptions


highly private locus

access to public is sharply curtailed


treasure trove

traditional: concealed gold or silver in a refined form
Modern trend includes paper money, jewels and other valuables
the owner must be unknown
traditionally the finder prevails, modern, it follows the lost property rules


inter vivos gift

has title effectively passed from x-y by virtue of a valid gift?
3 requirements:
1. donative intent
2. valid delivery
3. valid acceptance


donative intent

only the intent to pass title now not the intent to pass possession now
it is easier to find donative intent if the parties stand in a close relationship to one another


valid delivery

1. actual physical delivery
2. donee already in possession
3. constructive delivery(keys to car, passcode to savings account)
4. deeg of gift


delivery of checks or promissory notes

no delivery if I hand someone a check and a promissory note promising to pay in the future but delivery if I hand someone a 3rd party check and promissory note which are payable to me even without endorsement


delivery of stock certificates and life insurance policy

If I hand you a certificate of shares from a company, the delivery is valid without the company having been informed or endorsement


joint checking account and delivery

there is a rebuttable presumption that there is no gift if only one person puts all the money into the account


person in the middle delivery

delivery is valid if the middle man is the donee's agent but not if it is donor's


valid acceptance

silence is valid acceptance, one must affirmatively refuse a gift


gifts causa mortis

gifts given in contemplation of death
1. must meet the intent, delivery and acceptance requirement
2. death must be contemplated from an internal not external peril
3. four part revocation


internal peril

something that is wrong with the individual now, like a disease or even a wound
external peril is a fear of something that has not happened yet such as flying in a plane


the four part revocation checklist

1. donor revokes (requires an act of the party, the other 3 occur by operation of law.
2. donor recovers
3. donee dies before the donor
4. donor dies from a different cause than he anticipated dying from
modern trend: if the donor would have dies anyway and it is simply fortuitous that he died in a different way, the gift will not be defeated



custody coupled with the intent to serve as bailee
security deposit boxes are bailments
parking lots are bailments if one gives up the keys and control of the car


when bailment is lost, destroyed or damaged

sue for damages in negligence or strict liability
if the bailment is:
1. sole benefit of the bailor: gross negligence
2. sole benefit to the bailee: slight negligence
3. mutual benefit: ordinary negligence
4. modern trend: all ordinary negligence


negligence action for bailment

the bailor only need to shoe that the bailment existed and when he or she showed up to get the object it was damaged, destroyed or gone. this shifts the BOP to the bailee to show that the loss occurred despite his or her due care


strict liability bailments

1. deviation form agreed upon use
2. misdelivery (delivery of a perfectly forged document
Exception: indispensible instrument exception:certain types of situations where the commercial burden is regarded as too onerous but the bailee can still be held liable for fault (parking lot, dry cleaner)


baliee v. third person

bailees can recover against 3rd parties who have wrongfully taken or damaged goods in their possession. however, any amount recieved in excess of the bailee's special interest belongs to the bailor


exculpatory clauses

1. you cannot completely exculpate yourself from liability
2. can limit liability IF the limitation is known to the bailor
3. such limitation is only effective against the bailees ordinary negligence nothing greater such as recklessness