Bill Mastro's upcoming sentencing

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I find that hard to believe, I thought the rule throughout the US was nemo dat quod non habet -- a thief cannot convey good title, therefore a subsequent purchaser cannot acquire good title. Always happy to learn though.

You and your damn French.

Tom C

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

You and your damn French.

Tom C

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnOcwy3Jle0

[Exhibitman]

Unfortunately the UCC is not uniform across jurisdictions. Many states enact their own modified versions. I ran across one such variance between states in a case and it made a difference in the outcome.

[danmckee]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Unfortunately the UCC is not uniform across jurisdictions. Many states enact their own modified versions. I ran across one such variance between states in a case and it made a difference in the outcome.

Did you win or lose that one Adam?

[calvindog]

While I'm sure all of the civil lawyers mean well, I think you're doing a disservice to Leon who, as noted in the Heritage catalog, was engaging in "philanthropy" by selling his collection to pay for his daughter's education. I say this sincerely that I think the last thing he would then want to have happen is to use a legal loophole to keep a card stolen from the New York Public Library. Kind of the opposite of "philanthropy," you know?

[Peter_Spaeth]

This civil lawyer does not believe such a loophole exists, assuming the card was stolen. But if someone can point me to something contrary....

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This civil lawyer does not believe such a loophole exists, assuming the card was stolen. But if someone can point me to something contrary....

I'm controlling myself from making the obvious joke here....

[Exhibitman]

Won it, Dan.

It depends on how the item was taken. A burglar gets nothing by way of title in the USA. An embezzler, check kiter or similar criminal fraudster gets voidable title that may be cleared by a bona fide purchaser. It depends on which version of the UCC the state uses. Quite apart from that is the issue of limitations. A lawsuit to reclaim an item after the theft of a readily identifiable item that has gone through multiple public sales over decades may be deemed to be untimely even if the original thief obtained only void (no) title.

As for the rest of the commentary re lawyers, I hope that every lawyer would analyze the issues based on getting his or her client what he or she wants, regardless of the outcome. My client may be a crook but he is entitled to the full benefit of the law same as I am. If there is a chance that the client has good title I need to advise accordingly even if I disagree. We all represent our share of scumbags, right counsellors?

fWIW if it was my card involved I would force them to prove it was stolen before I hand it back. Sorry but I'm not going to hand $50k or more to someone on the basis of anything written here no matter how well intentioned.