Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 75 views

    Okeefe V Snyder

    Uploaded by

    MissPardis
    1) In 1946, three paintings by O'Keeffe were stolen from an art gallery. In 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that one of the paintings was now owned by Snyder, who claimed he acquired it through adverse possession. 2) The trial court granted summary judgment for Snyder, but the appellate court granted it for O'Keeffe. The issue was whether the statute of limitations for adverse possession is tolled if the property was stolen and the owner made diligent efforts to locate it. 3) The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled if the owner makes diligent efforts to find stolen property. Possession of stolen property cannot lead to acquisition of title by adverse

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Okeefe V Snyder

    Uploaded by

    MissPardis
    75 views2 pages
    1) In 1946, three paintings by O'Keeffe were stolen from an art gallery. In 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that one of the paintings was now owned by Snyder, who claimed he acquired it through adverse possession. 2) The trial court granted summary judgment for Snyder, but the appellate court granted it for O'Keeffe. The issue was whether the statute of limitations for adverse possession is tolled if the property was stolen and the owner made diligent efforts to locate it. 3) The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled if the owner makes diligent efforts to find stolen property. Possession of stolen property cannot lead to acquisition of title by adverse

    Original Description:

    Okeefe v Snyder

    Original Title

    Okeefe v Snyder

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) In 1946, three paintings by O'Keeffe were stolen from an art gallery. In 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that one of the paintings was now owned by Snyder, who claimed he acquired it through adverse possession. 2) The trial court granted summary judgment for Snyder, but the appellate court granted it for O'Keeffe. The issue was whether the statute of limitations for adverse possession is tolled if the property was stolen and the owner made diligent efforts to locate it. 3) The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled if the owner makes diligent efforts to find stolen property. Possession of stolen property cannot lead to acquisition of title by adverse

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    75 views2 pages

    Okeefe V Snyder

    Uploaded by

    MissPardis
    1) In 1946, three paintings by O'Keeffe were stolen from an art gallery. In 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that one of the paintings was now owned by Snyder, who claimed he acquired it through adverse possession. 2) The trial court granted summary judgment for Snyder, but the appellate court granted it for O'Keeffe. The issue was whether the statute of limitations for adverse possession is tolled if the property was stolen and the owner made diligent efforts to locate it. 3) The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled if the owner makes diligent efforts to find stolen property. Possession of stolen property cannot lead to acquisition of title by adverse

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Acquisition by Adverse Possession

    Adverse Possession of Chattels

    (P) O'Keeffe v. Snyder

    Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1980


    416 A.2d 862
    Pages 151-161 Case Book

    Facts: In 1946 three paintings by O'Keeffe were stolen from an art gallery operated by her
    husband, Stieglitz. O'Keeffe suspected that Estrick may have stolen the paintings. However, she
    did not confront him about it; nor did she report the theft to the police. She said she didn't do
    anything because she was settling her dead husbands estate. Then in 1972 O'Keeffe authorized
    Bry to report the theft to the Art Dealers Association of America. In 1976, she found out that a
    guy named Snyder bought them from another guy named Frank. Frank said he got them from his
    father and said his father had them as early as 1941. Snyder conceded that the paintings are
    stolen. Frank claimed continuous possession for over 30 years thru his father and claimed title
    thru adverse possession.

    Procedural History: Trial court granted summary judgment for Snyder. P appealed, Appellate
    division granted summary judgment for the O'Keeffe. D appealed.

    Issue: If possession of chattels is obtained through theft, and the true owner makes diligent
    efforts to locate and recover the chattels, is the statute of limitations for adverse possession
    tolled?

    Holding: Reversed and remanded for trial in accordance with opinion.

    Reasoning: Yes, a thief cannot transfer good title. If Frank acquired a voidable title from his
    father, who may have been the thief, Frank has the power to transfer good title to a good faith
    purchase under the U.C.C. If Snyder was not a good faith purchaser, or if Frank did not have
    voidable title, Snyder may still acquire title by adverse possession.

    RULE:

    The statute of limitations is tolled if the owner of stolen chattel makes diligent efforts to locate
    and recover the lost chattel.

    Court makes it more difficult to obtain title to personal property by adverse possession: if the
    owner uses diligence to locate and recover the property, the statue is tolled.

    VOCAB:

    1. Conversion: to take property from another

    2. Discovery Rule: the rules by which one may obtain title to chattels by adverse possession. It
    provides that the statute of limitations does not run if the true owner uses diligence to discover
    the possessor of his property.
    Acquisition by Adverse Possession
    Adverse Possession of Chattels

    3. Implead: to bring a third party into a lawsuit on the ground that such third party is liable to
    the defendant.

    4. Interrogatory: a formal set of questions propounded to a party designed to elicit the facts.

    5. Legatees: a person who takes property under a will.

    6. Plenary Hearing: a complete hearing of a case to fully determine the facts.

    7. Replevin: an action to regain possession.

    8. Replevy: to take or get back by a right for replevin.

    9. Summary Judgment: judgment rendered in a case based only on consideration of the law,
    where there is no dispute of the facts.

    10. Voidable Title: title which remains valid until the true owner asserts ownership

    You might also like