Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Law School Confidential Property Hypo  (Read 2857 times)

Jumboshrimps

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 598
    • View Profile
Re: Law School Confidential Property Hypo
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2006, 04:30:15 PM »
...but this all depends, of course, on whether Frodo can get the ring to the fire, in which case the people of Middle Earth are the real winners.

SymphonyOfDreams

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: Law School Confidential Property Hypo
« Reply #11 on: April 21, 2006, 04:34:10 PM »
Leaf your explanation pretty much fits with the way property right of movable goods ar transfered in my country. I guess it is true the whole thing about Lousiana Law being more related to French-Roman tradition than that of Common Law...

Leaf2001br

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • My two cents.
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Leaf2001br
    • View Profile
    • Isaac Online
    • Email
Re: Law School Confidential Property Hypo
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2006, 01:59:40 AM »
Yes Symphony, the French Code Civil in the Roman tradition is alive an well in Louisiana, though we are officially a mixed jurisdiction.  As a U.S. state, some common law has crept in, but the Civil Code is always given primary consideration regarding interpersonal civil relationships (Property, Obligations, Tort, etc.).  The exception is criminal law.  When the U.S. annexed Louisiana, they compromised with the distraught Louisianians by allowing the Civil Code to remain, but they weren't entirely trusting of French and Spanish speakers and drew the line at a criminal code that wasn't in English.
"What is Legal?  What is Illegal?  What is 'Barely Legal'?"  - Ali G

Amicus Curiae

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Law School Confidential Property Hypo
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2013, 10:02:11 AM »
I think people are missing one key fact in this hypo...

". . . sold to dealer D and then sold to E."

E is a bone fide purchaser. E now has ownership of the chattel. In most jurisdictions, A will not prevail in an action for replevin.

DeWeerth v. Baldinger
38 F.3d 1266 (2d Cir.) cert. denied 513 U.S. 1001 (1994)