Lexplug logoLexplug

Haslem v. Lockwood

Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors
37 Conn. 500 (1871) (1871)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A person who finds abandoned personal property and greatly increases its value through labor acquires a pre-possessory interest, granting them a reasonable amount of time to take it away, which is protected against a subsequent finder.


Facts:

  • Travelers' animals dropped manure onto a public highway within the borough of Stamford.
  • The travelers, who were the original owners of the animals, abandoned the manure where it lay scattered.
  • The plaintiff found the scattered manure and, through his labor, scraped it into two heaps on the side of the road.
  • The plaintiff's action of gathering the manure into heaps greatly enhanced its value.
  • The plaintiff left the heaps of manure with the intention of returning later to carry them away.
  • Before the plaintiff could return, the defendant discovered the heaps and appropriated them for his own use.
  • The removal of the manure was considered beneficial to the appearance and health of the borough.

Procedural Posture:

  • The plaintiff initiated a lawsuit against the defendant in the Court of Common Pleas, a trial-level court.
  • The case was brought before the state's highest court for advice on the controlling questions of law before a final judgment was rendered by the trial court.

Locked

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 gathers abandoned manure from a public highway into piles acquire a temporary right of possession to that property sufficient to support an action for conversion against a person who takes it before it can be removed?


Opinions:

Majority - Park, J.

Yes. A person who gathers abandoned manure into piles acquires a temporary right of possession. The court reasoned that manure on a public highway is abandoned personal property, not real property, distinguishing it from manure used for agriculture on a farm. The plaintiff, by being the first to take possession (occupancy) of the abandoned property and greatly increasing its value through his labor, established a property right. This right is not lost by leaving the property for a 'reasonable time' to procure the means for its removal. The defendant, having no superior claim, is considered a 'mere wrong doer' for appropriating the fruits of the plaintiff's labor. The plaintiff's peaceable possession is sufficient to maintain an action against the defendant.



Analysis:

This decision establishes a foundational principle in property law regarding the acquisition of rights in abandoned property (res nullius) through the doctrine of occupancy. It clarifies that adding significant labor to change the condition and enhance the value of abandoned property is a crucial act in establishing a possessory right. The court's introduction of a 'reasonable time' to retrieve the property protects the laborer's investment, preventing a subsequent party from unfairly capitalizing on that labor. This case is a classic illustration of how property rights can be created through effort and is often used to teach the fundamentals of first possession.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Haslem v. Lockwood (1871) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Haslem v. Lockwood