McAvoy v. Medina

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts · 1866 · Property

Propertyfinderslost propertymislaid propertyowner of premisesfinderlost propertymislaid property

Facts

A customer in the defendant's shop voluntarily placed property on a table and accidentally left it there without later calling for it. The plaintiff, also a customer in the shop, first saw the property and picked it up from the table. The defendant then received and held the property. The dispute was whether the plaintiff finder had a right to take and keep the property as against the defendant.

Issue

When property is voluntarily placed on a table in a shop by its owner and then accidentally left behind, does a customer who first finds it acquire a possessory right against the shopkeeper? Or is the property not lost in the relevant sense, leaving the shopkeeper entitled to hold it for the true owner?

Rule

Although a finder of lost property generally has a valid claim against all but the true owner, that rule does not apply when the property was voluntarily placed in a particular location by the owner and then forgotten there. In that circumstance, the property is not treated as lost property, and the owner of the premises has the duty to use reasonable care to keep it safely until the true owner calls for it.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a bakery in Portland, Maine, Lena Ortiz set her phone on a display ledge while paying for coffee and walked out without it. A minute later, another customer, Jordan Pike, picked up the phone from the ledge and told the bakery manager he intended to keep it unless the owner contacted him directly.

As between Jordan and the bakery, who has the better right to possess the phone until the true owner appears?

Explanation. The majority rule distinguishes lost property from property voluntarily placed somewhere and then forgotten. When the item was intentionally set down in a shop and accidentally left behind, the finder acquires no original possessory right against the shopkeeper. The premises owner should hold the property with reasonable care for the true owner.