The post above would probably fail first year property class exam in law school.
First, it is arguable whether leaving property in the HALLWAY would constitute "trespass" on real property, because hallway in most cases would be considered as public area. Also, there could be an issue whether there is implied consent for the tenant to leave property one day before entering the apartment. Even if, it is trespass, landlord still does not have the right to take the property as his own. Most people went to a real law school for a JD program should remember this hypo, if a neighbour's tree extending over your property, it is trespass and you have the right to cut off the tree according to the property line. However, you still have to return the log you cut down to your neighbour because it does not belong to you.
Second, abandoned property argument does not apply in this case. In most states, there would be some lost and found statutes governing such situation. Even under common law, a objective standard is used to determine whether a property is abandoned, which is whether a reasonable person would think the property is abandoned by its owner under the circumstances. If you see a car unlocked with its key on its engine, it does not mean you can take it because you believe it is abandoned. Especially in this case when the landlord knows or has reason to know that someone moving in may own the property, there is no way a reasonable person would think this property is abandoned. So the landlord has to return it to its rightful owner.
if you have time, go to the small claim court which the house is located and bring all the evidence you have to sue for "CONVERSION", it is very likely with sufficient evidence, you would prevail.
First, it is arguable whether leaving property in the HALLWAY would constitute "trespass" on real property, because hallway in most cases would be considered as public area. Also, there could be an issue whether there is implied consent for the tenant to leave property one day before entering the apartment. Even if, it is trespass, landlord still does not have the right to take the property as his own. Most people went to a real law school for a JD program should remember this hypo, if a neighbour's tree extending over your property, it is trespass and you have the right to cut off the tree according to the property line. However, you still have to return the log you cut down to your neighbour because it does not belong to you.
Second, abandoned property argument does not apply in this case. In most states, there would be some lost and found statutes governing such situation. Even under common law, a objective standard is used to determine whether a property is abandoned, which is whether a reasonable person would think the property is abandoned by its owner under the circumstances. If you see a car unlocked with its key on its engine, it does not mean you can take it because you believe it is abandoned. Especially in this case when the landlord knows or has reason to know that someone moving in may own the property, there is no way a reasonable person would think this property is abandoned. So the landlord has to return it to its rightful owner.
if you have time, go to the small claim court which the house is located and bring all the evidence you have to sue for "CONVERSION", it is very likely with sufficient evidence, you would prevail.
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
