This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Money

Who Should Get the Money?

Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.

Any subject. Any type of essay. We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.

GET YOUR PRICE

writers online

Who Should Get the Money?

Unless a property is abandoned, a true owner is liable to reclaim the asset. In this case, Grande, a representative of her father, Spann’s estate, is embroiled in a dispute involving $500,000 that was discovered by Cuen, a renovator, during a renovation for the new owners, McCallum and Jennings (Grande v Jennings/McCallum 2). According to the dictates of the law, true owners of a lost or mislaid property, Grande, in this case, can reclaim the possession.

Grande should be given the $500,000 that Cuen took. For starters, the cans which contained the cash were voluntarily placed by Robert Spann, meaning that the property was mislaid. The law states that mislaid property belongs to the original owner and that whoever finds the property is simply a caretaker (Miller 637). It is easy to prove that the property was mislaid, given that Spann hid his other fortunes in unlikely places, and Grande and her sister Kim, who knew their father’s wealth-hiding habit, had to destroy sections of the house to recover some items. From this reasoning, Cuen and Jennings and Clinton McCallum only to exercise care over the money until Grande recovers the funds hoping that she will likely return to reclaim her father’s property. Even supposing that the property was lost, Grande would still have first ownership rights as evidenced by law (Miller 637). A property finder can claim ownership of the item against an entire world, except the true owner (Miller 637). As such, whether Cuen or McCallum or Jennings found the money, Grande would be entitled to the funds because her estate is the primary owner of the house. Moreover, Grande can file a tort of conversion case against Cuen, McCallum, and Jennings should they fail to return the money, yet they know Grande’s family are the true owners of the fortune. Grande has more rights to the money than the other parties.

To sum up, the law favors true owners of a property that is lost or mislaid. From the case, Grande’s family are the true owners of the money because it belonged to their father, who left them the house. If this case goes to trial, Grande will likely be the winner. Being a true property owner is advantageous in disputes relating to a fortune.

Works Cited

Grande v Jennings/McCallum.” The Court of Appeal state of Arizona Division 1, n.d.

Miller, Roger. “Personal Property, Bailments, and Insurance.” In Business Law Today: The Essentials. Texas: Cengage Learning.

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask