Contractor Fights Owner for Cash in Wall
Posted: 2007-12-13 17:15:41
Filed Under: Weird News
CLEVELAND (Dec. 12) – A contractor who helped discover bundles of Depression-era U.S. currency totaling $182,000 hidden behind bathroom walls said the homeowner should turn the money over to him or at least share it.
Bob Kitts said his feud with the owner of the 83-year house, a former high school classmate, has deteriorated to the point where they speak to each other only through lawyers.
Kitts said his lawyer has drafted a lawsuit that he hopes will force Amanda Reece to turn over the money she has kept.
Most of the currency, issued in 1927 and 1929, is in good condition, and some of the bills are so rare that one currency appraiser valued the treasure at up to $500,000, Kitts said.
Reece accuses Kitts of extortion.
The fight began in May 2006 when Kitts was gutting Reece’s bathroom and found a box below the medicine cabinet that contained $25,200.
“I almost passed out,” Kitts recalled. “It was the ultimate contractor fantasy.”
He called Reece, who rushed home. Together they found another steel box tied to the end of a wire nailed to a stud. Inside was more than $100,000, Kitts said. Two more boxes were filled with a mix of money and religious memorabilia.
“It was insane,” Kitts said. “She was in shock – she was a wreck.”
The bundles had “P. Dunne” written on them, a likely reference to Peter Dunne, a businessman who owned the home during the Depression.
Kitts said he took some of the currency for an appraisal and learned that many of the $10 bills were rare 1929-series Cleveland Federal Reserve bank notes, worth about $85 each. There also were $500 bills and one $1,000 bill.
John Chambers, an attorney for Reece, said Kitts rejected his client’s offer of a 10 percent finder’s fee and demanded 40 percent of the small fortune.
Reece has no intention of backing down in the face of what she considers a shakedown, Chambers said.
Here is the full story.
Would you:
Split 50-50?
Offer 10% finder’s fees?
Keep all for yourself if you are the homeowner?
It clearly belongs 100% to the home owner, and a 10% offer was unrequired, and very generous. He should have taken his windfall thankfully.
This is obvious if you consider the word “owner” in “home owner.” Perhaps in a country without individual property ownership rights there would be some question about it, but it should be obvious to most Americans on the street, without needing to resport to lawyers.
The home owner seems to understand this, and I predict that the contractor will not only get nothing, but be forced to pay the home owners legal bills related to the matter.
Now, if it was a rental property, then it would be fuzzier, though the contractor still wouldn’t have a claim. In that case, there would be ownership on one hand, but on the other the renter is in “possession” of the property.
I also would have offered some small percentage as a finder’s fee, but obviously after they try to extort more, then they wouldn’t get even that from me.
Agreed wurg rubypanther.
My problem is there will always be lawyers who’ll represent the scum. People like this lawyer and Laffernati are giving all lawyers a bad name.
Ouch. What the greed of money can cause. I equate this to someone coming into my house and taking something because they saw it.
10% is more than generous.
Yes! I do completely agree with all the comments before!
The owner is right and 10% is more than enough!!!
The contractor is being greedy. He was hired to do a job, not as a partner in a treasure-finding operation. A 10% offer is quite generous.
You are all wrong.
To those who think that it “clearly” belongs to Reece. That is NOT the law in the State of Ohio or elsewhere, unless Mr. Dunne “forgot” that he hid a fortune in his wall.
Under Ohio law (as elsewhere), the law is that the finder of gold, silver, or the paper representation thereof (i.e. money) that has been hidden by its true owner (here Mr. Dunne) takes title to that property, or at least takes title over all others except for Mr. Dunne’s heirs (and I hope for everyone’s sake that the “finders” did some investigation to try to find those heirs, otherwise they could be looking at felony conversion charges). That is true even if the money was found hidden in the walls of a house owned by another. That makes sense, because if the mere purchase of the house could transfer ownership, then whoever bought the house immediately after Dunne died (which was not Reece) would be the owner. Further, this law is especially clear where the “finder” is an employee of the homeowner, the reason being that this demonstrates that the finder was rightfully on the property (i.e. is not a tresspasser). So, if Dunne hid the money and died still knowing exactly where it was hidden, the money now belongs to the contractor. Counter-intuitive, maybe, but it is still the law. End of story.
If, on the other hand, if Reece can convince the Court that Dunne forgot where he left the money (a tough proof, since he is dead), then the money will be considered to be “mislaid” instead of “treasure trove,” and Reece will have the stronger claim to it under the law.
Bottom line, whatever you think is “fair” is irrelevant. There is abundant law on this point, and, as the law professor above mentioned, the law does NOT clearly favor of the homeowner. If the parties don’t settle, both sides face real risk of getting zero.
Neither of them deserve that money if late Businessman Mr. Dunne has heirs alive.
8:29 is right.
Treasure trove is property that consists of coins or currency hidden by the owner. To be considered treasure trove and not mislaid property, the property must have been deliberately hidden or concealed, and sufficiently long ago that the original owner can be considered dead or not discoverable.
Under American common law, treasure trove belongs to the finder, unless the original owner reclaims. Some states have rejected the American common law and hold that treasure trove belongs to the owner of the property in which the treasure trove was found. These courts reason that the American common law rule encourages trespass.
But, since the contractor in this case was not trespassing when he found the loot, it is his not hers.
Usually when the discussion on this blog moves off of chess it degenerates and isn’t of much value, but this discussion has actually been very enlightening. Thank you to all of the posters who brought forth both the finer points of law.
Once this is publicized widely, we’ll see how many ‘long lost relatives show up’ and perhaps ironically neither the current owner or the contractor will get anything!
Only in America! Take the 10% and be happy, or involve lawyers and burn in hell with them.
I bet to every law that says the money belongs to the finder there is a law that says it belongs to the owner of the property and a law that says it belongs to the heirs of the one who hid it.
Dunne does have heirs living.
Google Patrick and Mary (Gannon)Dunne and Agatha Gannon that all resided in that house and it isn’t too hard to find their heirs.
It is my bet that the heirs are going to be entitled to the money, And I bet they are already represented before the court. I will not say how I know at this time, but I do know. Keep an eye on my further comments as I will keep you up to date on thr happenings.
Larry Morrow, Worldwide Finders
Euclid, Ohio
Of course there are heirs and they are easy to find. A suit is already in the works.