104
No. This would not be illegal.
You are not trespassing or breaking and entering since you have permission to be on the premises, and you are the rightful owner of the guitar so you are not depriving him of property that belongs to him.
If you did this with the assistance of a law enforcement officer, rather than Bob's family, without a court order ...
81
Yes, it's illegal
You are missing something terribly important:
The package might not be your property [yet]. In any way, it is not in your possession, while it is in the hands of the postal service!
The contents of the package started fully owned by the sender and were entrusted to the postal service to deliver it. This entrustment is (contractually) ...
67
Yes.
Let's assume this anecdote takes place while Gates was CEO. Bill Gates doesn't own all of Microsoft, and as an officer of the company, he owes a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders as a whole. Taking the company's property for personal use breaches that fiduciary duty.
Now, in this particular hypothetical, ...
59
You have to give them back
You don’t own other peoples stuff just because it’s on your property.
However, you may be entitled to salvage rights - that is, payment for recovery of the vessel.
53
Trespass to land in most instances is a civil matter, and as such the police do not have the power to assist. Initially, the landowner should ask the trespasser to leave the land and if he/she does then all is well. If he/she refuses to leave the land then you will need to consider taking civil action. It could be dangerous for the landowner to try to remove ...
50
If you are arrested for assault, you have available to you the defense of the right to defend real or personal property: you "may use reasonable force to protect that property from imminent harm. Reasonable force means the amount of force that a reasonable person in
the same situation would believe is necessary to protect the property from imminent harm". ...
49
Yes
Even if the CEO is the 100% owner of a private company.
Bill Gates and Microsoft are different people: Bill’s stuff is not Microsoft’s stuff and vice versa. If Bill takes Microsoft’s stuff without permission with the intent of permanently depriving Microsoft of it, that’s theft. The fact that Bill has the power to authorize the taking doesn’t matter if ...
46
Ohwilleke's answer is good, but there is a further point to consider.
You say that Bob is your ex. Are there grounds for him thinking that this guitar was a joint purchase while you were a couple, and hence that he has a right to it? If it could be a joint purchase, you would not be stealing it back - but nor is he. You could potentially end up being sued ...
36
What is the legality of someone putting a virtual hot spot on your property without permission? I know we are in uncharted territory but how would this compare to setting up a contest that would require going on your property without permission?
The existence of a game does not authorise entrance to private property, barring some agreement with the owner.
...
36
You cannot pass on better title than you have
The fraudster (B) in this scenario does not have good title in the car and so the thief (C) doesn't either: 1) because they are a thief and 2) because the person they stole it from didn't own it. If C had paid B for the car then C would still not own it because while they are no longer a thief, B still doesn't ...
32
This is a general common law answer; specifics in California may differ.
Yes, they are committing the tort of trespass and you could sue them for whatever damage they did to your property; probably nothing.
On the other hand, if you keep the ball, you are committing the tort of detinue (wrongful detention of another person's goods when the owner has ...
26
Maryland has no law requiring a neighbor to not plant / trim trees that might shade a solar panel (on the ground or on the roof). There are laws against deeds, declarations, covenants, contracts etc. (excepting registered historic properties) which prohibit of roof panels (e.g. as part of a HOA's rules). The law also recognizes the right to enter into an ...
26
No. At least, not technically. Theft is taking without consent of the owner. The CEO is authorized to act on behalf of the company, and thus can give themself permission to take the computer. Even if the CEO isn't explicitly granted authority to distribute resources, there's a strong implicit authority. To substantiate a charge of theft, a prosecutor would ...
25
There are two very important points you should keep in mind here:
You are not under any obligation whatsoever to investigate the owner of a vehicle parked on your property.
You have full rights to tow any unauthorized vehicle off of your property.
So, by far the easiest thing for you to do is to shift all responsibility off of yourself. Make it somebody ...
23
Legally, yes.
Under Penal Code 198.5, California follows the Castle doctrine, meaning there is no duty to retreat if a resident confronts an intruder inside the home. Residents are permitted to use force against intruders who break into their homes, or try to force their way in.
A legal presumption means the prosecutor in a case must prove that the resident ...
20
Laws regarding billboards and advertising are very local in nature and are typically handled under city/county zoning ordinances. Start with calling your local county zoning office. They will tell you the city/county laws regarding your particular residential zoning overlay, if city or state laws supersede county laws, and recent changes in law that might ...
18
Is that person legally obligated to give back the samples?
If the samples are kept then there may be an offence of theft by finding
The finder of lost property acquires a possessory right by taking
physical control of the property, but does not necessarily have
ownership of the property. The finder must take reasonable steps to
locate the owner.
16
If the ex-wife had a legal right to occupy the house, then the ex-wife also had the legal right to invite in others.
Removing the wife’s right to occupy the house would be part of the judge’s divorce decree, but if the wife did not have another primary domicile arranged, forcible removal would be an eviction which would, itself, need to run its own legal ...
answered Aug 1 '20 at 12:51
Harper - Reinstate Monica
10.1k2 gold badges13 silver badges47 bronze badges
15
In Civil law jurisdictions, the heir of a deceased person will generally inherit all the possessions, rights and obligations - this may include debts.
So if a borrower passes away, the lender will typicall find out who is the heir, and ask them to pay. The heir will be required to pay, and the creditor can use the usual channels (reminders, collection ...
15
I am not a lawyer. I do not fully know of the current case law or climate of this type of law in Maryland. The cause of action you are looking for is private nuisance.
“Section 821D of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (1979) defines a private nuisance as a nontrespassory invasion of another’s interest in the private use and enjoyment of land.” See Echard v....
15
In the UK it is an offence to cause a computer to gain unauthorised access to any program or data held in any computer (s1 Computer Misuse Act 1990).
It seems likely that other European jurisdictions have similar laws. Certainly Germany does: Penal Code 202a data espionage (German text - English translation). (I mention Germany because the linked thread ...
15
Precedents And General Considerations
There are cases of similar things happening in Protestant churches and it ends up being quite case by case fact specific with details of how title is held to property, the exact language of governance documents, since Protestant churches are organized at a governance level, and hold property titled in a variety of ways. ...
13
There are two issues, one is the legal issue of whether what you are doing is a crime, and the other is the evidentiary issue of proving that that is what happened.
If you take the phone home with the intention of keeping it ('finders keepers') then you have committed larceny (sometimes called 'theft', sometimes correctly). This specific type is called '...
13
Everything may theoretically vary by jurisdiction, which you haven't specified.
Stolen property remains the property of the lawful owner.
Assuming that Person A can demonstrate their lawful ownership, person A gets the car back.
If the car has been damaged or destroyed, person A may sue persons B and (possibly) C for restitution to cover the loss. In ...
12
The fundamental question is whether children can own property: they clearly can. See Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure (I improved the link so it can be more easily read).
As a general rule any property acquired by the child in any way except
by its own labor or services belongs to the child, and not to the
parent
McClosky v. Cyphert, 3 Casey (27 Pa.) ...
12
California has a particular set of regulations addressing coastal land ownership, detailed at https://www.coastal.ca.gov/laws/
In short, everything below the high-tide mark along the coast is public access. If you own coastal property, you don't own anything below that point and you cannot prevent public access, as explained in Why California's Beaches are ...
12
They aren't "imposing tax laws at the state level", and the states are still perfectly free to award whatever credits they like. There's a more complete explanation here.
Before 2017, if you paid, say, $30,000 in state taxes, you could take a $30,000 deduction from your federal taxable income, thus reducing your federal income taxes by some fraction of $...
12
No, you could not have prevented them from collecting their belongings
But you could have sued for trespass
Unless those boxes were part of the contract for sale, they remain the vendor’s property and just like you can’t withhold your mate’s trombone that he accidentally left after that great party, you can’t withhold the vendor’s boxes - that’s called “...
11
Probably not.
Overview
You haven't specified a jurisdiction. I will talk about Australia because that's what I'm familiar with.
In Australia the most relevant area of law would be tort, specifically negligence. The university would be liable to pay damages if a court found that it owed a duty of care to your friend, that it breached that duty, and that ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
