Court Opinion

ID: 9653284
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:43:08.268501+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:57.554969
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Wilson,
concurring.
I concur in the result. In so far as money buried or secreted on privately owned realty is concerned, the old distinctions between treasure-trove, lost property, and mislaid property seem to be of little value and not worth preserving. The principal point of distinction seems to be the intent of the true owner who necessarily is not known and not available. Therefore the evidence on his intent will usually be scant and uncontroverted. From my experience as a District Attorney, I would guess his motivation often to be that of the one-talent servant in the parable in the 25th Chapter of Matthew: “And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: * * We should hold that the owner of the land has possession of all property secreted in, on and under his land and continues to hold possession for the true owner, who, incidentally, may not always be the person doing the burying. Matthew 13:44 — “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath and buyeth that field.” What reason is there for transferring possession to the individual who happens to dig up the property? Or for guessing about the intent or the memory of the person doing the burying? A simple solution for all of these problems is to maintain the continuity of possession of the landowner until the true owner establishes his title.
Opinion delivered November 23, 1955.
Rehearing overruled December 21, 1955.