Ganter v. Kapiloff
1986 Md. App. LEXIS 408, 69 Md. App. 97, 516 A.2d. 611 (1986)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A finder of lost personal property holds it against all the world except the rightful owner. The common saying 'finders keepers, losers weepers' is not a legally recognized principle of ownership.
Facts:
- In approximately 1976, brothers Leonard and Bernard Kapiloff, who were stamp collectors, purchased two sets of valuable stamps.
- In either 1979 or 1980, Robert L. Ganter purchased a used dresser for thirty dollars from a furniture store.
- While cleaning the dresser, Ganter discovered the stamps hidden inside a glassine envelope accompanied by a certificate.
- Ganter had no particular interest in the stamps at the time and did not have them appraised.
- Around Thanksgiving 1982, Ganter took the stamps to an auction house and was told they were a 'sensational find.'
- On February 1, 1983, Bernard Kapiloff saw Ganter's stamps advertised for sale in a nationally circulated catalogue and recognized them as his own.
- Kapiloff contacted Ganter to demand the return of the stamps.
- Ganter refused the demand, asserting that the stamps were his property because he had found them.
Procedural Posture:
- Leonard and Bernard Kapiloff sued Robert L. Ganter and J. & H. Stolow, Inc., in the District Court of Maryland for Baltimore City, seeking the return of the stamps through an action of replevin.
- Ganter removed the case to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, a higher-level trial court.
- The Kapiloffs amended their complaint to include a request for a declaratory judgment that they were the true owners of the stamps.
- The Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.) took physical possession of the stamps from the auction house.
- The Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Kapiloffs, ruling they were the owners.
- Ganter (appellant) appealed the trial court's summary judgment ruling to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland (the intermediate appellate court).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a person who finds lost personal property acquire a claim of ownership superior to that of the true owner?
Opinions:
Majority - Gilbert, Chief Judge
No, a person who finds lost personal property does not acquire a claim of ownership superior to that of the true owner. The court explained that the popular maxim 'finders keepers' is legally unsound and has no basis in law. Citing long-standing common law precedent from cases like Armory v. Delamirie, the court affirmed the principle that a finder of lost property acquires rights against all the world except for the true owner. The finder is considered a bailee for the true owner, and once the true owner is identified and makes a claim, the finder's possessory interest ceases. The court dismissed Ganter's other arguments as mere speculation and immaterial to the question of legal ownership, such as the possibility a brother sold the stamps or that the owners' failure to insure them negated ownership.
Analysis:
This decision emphatically reaffirms a foundational principle of personal property law, clarifying that a finder's rights are always subordinate to those of the true owner. The court's dismissal of the 'finders keepers' maxim serves as a clear statement that popular folklore does not override centuries of established common law. This case reinforces the stability and security of title for owners of personal property, ensuring that ownership is not lost simply by misplacing an item. For future cases, it stands for the proposition that a finder's claim, while strong against third parties, immediately yields when confronted with a valid claim from the original owner.
