Posted: December 15th, 2022

FACTS: One evening a Yerf-Dog go-kart

Name: Group #
Chapter # 29 Case # 1
FACTS: One evening a Yerf-Dog go-kart was stolen from the driveway of Susan Lacroix when she went inside to have her dinner. Later, the person who stole the go-kart put an advertisement in the newspaper and sold it to an individual known as Ronald Casey for half the price of what it was worth. At a later date, Lacroix was able to identify the kart in Casey’s yard and recognized it as hers via its serial number. In a charge brought by Lacroix to get Casey to return the go-kart, Casey claimed that he now owned it and had title to it since he paid for it without knowing that it had been stolen.
ISSUE: Is Casey’s argument that he owned the go-kart and had title to it since he paid for it without knowing that it had been stolen sound?
SUMMARY OF THE LAW: Under the stolen personal property law, a person who steals goods acquires no title for them-he/she only acquires possession. Therefore, the thief is not able to convey a good title. It is clear that even though the assumption of title of goods normally follows their possession, it is possible for an individual to possess goods without title, just as it is probable for an individual to have title without possession.

DECISION/REASON: No. Casey’s claim that he owned the go-kart and had title to it since he paid for it without knowing that it had been stolen is not sound. This is because the thief did not have title to the go-kart; he only had possession. To this end, he had no title to transfer to Casey. Lacroix never relinquished title to her go-kart, and even though Casey innocently acquired it in good faith and for value, the title of the go-kart never left Lacroix, the true owner. Therefore, Lacroix has the right to regain the possession of the go-kart.

Order | Check Discount