Armory v. Delamirie Brief- Piper PDF

Preview

Summary

case brief...

Description

Armory v. Delamirie King’s Bench 1722 p.126 Facts Armory found a jewel and took it to Delamirie’s goldsmith shop to find out what it was. An apprentice under Delamirie took the stones out of the socket and offered Armory money for the stones, to which Armory said he wanted to stones. The socket was returned without the stones. Cause of Action Armory sued Delamirie in attempt to recover the stones Remedy Specific performance Issue Whether Armory could recover the jewels that he found even though he lacked title to them? Rule Yes. Under three rules 1. Finder of a jewel, though he does not by such a finding acquire an absolute property right or ownership, yet he has a property as will enable him to keep it against all but the rightful owner, and consequently maintain trover 2. That the action well lay against the master, who gives credit to his apprentice, and is answerable for his neglect 3. As to the value of the jewel several of the trade were examined to prove what a jewel of the finest water that would fit the socket would be worth; and the chief justice directed the jury, that unless the defendant did produce the jewel and shew it not to be like the finest water, they should presume the strongest against him, and make the value of the best jewels the measure of their damages which they accordingly did Notes  Lawyers conceive property as referring to relationships among people with respect to things, not to a relationship between a person and a thing.  The meaning of a phrase true owner depends upon who the other claimants are. Title or ownership is relative  The rule that a prior possessor prevails over a subsequent possessor applies in cases involving land as well as in cases involving personal property.  Trover: o Common law action for money damages resulting in the defendant’s conversion to his own use of a chattel owned or possessed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff waives his right to obtain the return of the chattel and insists that the defendant be subjected to a forced purchase of the chattel from him.  Voluntary bailment: o Courts bar action by the true owner against the present possessor if the bailee has recovered from the present possessor  Replevin o Action to recover goods, not damages. Personal property only



Ejectment o Similar to replevin, but in real property o Courts more reluctant to give the prior possessor of land, who has no title, permanent damages than to put the prior possessor back into possession....