Benjamin (P) v. Lindner Aviation (D)
Supreme Court of Iowa,1995
Author: Starbord1

Facts:

            Benjamin, in his official duties of inspecting an airplane, removed the underside of a wing and discovered over $18,000 wrapped in foil. The plane was owned by State Central Bank as it had repossessed it from the former owner. The money was minted in the 1950-60s and smelled musty. P reported the find to his employer, Lindner Aviation, who was in charge of the inspection. P, D, and the bank claimed the money as theirs.

Issue:

            Does Benjamin have a right to the money as its finder?

In General:

            The rights of property vary according to the characterization of the property found.

Classification of the Property:

1.      Property is abandoned when the owner no longer wants to possess it. Abandonment is shown by proof that the owner intends to abandon the property and has voluntarily relinquished all right, title and interest in the property. Abandoned property belongs to the finder of the property against all others, including the former owner.

a.      The location of where the money was found is a factor in determining whether the money was lost property – ie: if it can be inferred that the money was left there unintentionally.

2.      Property is lost when the owner unintentionally and involuntarily parts with its possession and does not know where it is. Lost property becomes the property of the finder once the statutory procedures are followed and the owner makes no claim within 12 months.

3.      Mislaid property is voluntarily put in a certain place by the owner who then overlooks or forgets where the property is. It differs from lost property in that the owner voluntarily and intentionally places mislaid property in the location where it is eventually found by another. The finder of mislaid property acquires no rights to the property, instead the property belongs to the owner of the premises upon which it was found as against all persons other than the true owner.

a.      It is entrusted to the owner of the premises where it is found rather than the finder of the property because it is assumed that the true owner may eventually recall where he has placed his property and return there to reclaim it.

4.      Treasure trove consists of coin or currency concealed by the owner. To be classified as treasure trove, the property must have been hidden or concealed for such a length of time that the owner is probably dead or undiscoverable. Treasure trove belongs to the finder as against all but the true owner.

Reasoning:

1.      The circumstances here do not support a conclusion that the money was placed in the wing of an airplane unintentionally.

2.      Both logic and common sense suggest that it is unlikely someone would voluntarily part with over $18,000 with the intention of terminating his ownership.

3.      The mint dates, the musty odor and the rusty condition of a few of the panel screws indicate that the money may have been hidden for some time. There was no evidence, however, of the age of the airplane or the date of its last inspection, which leans it away from being treasure trove.

Dissent:

            The majority ignores the second part of test for determining that property is mislaid which is that the owner overlooks or forgets where the property is. It is not likely or reasonable to suppose that a person would secrete $18,000 in an airplane wing and then forget where it was. The scenario unfolded in this case convinces me that the money found in the airplane wing was abandoned. No owner had claimed it. No claim was made by the owner after legally prescribed notice was given that it had been found. Thereafter, logic and the law support a finding that the owner has voluntarily relinquished all right, title and interest in the property.