...has lost a piece of his personal property and is offering a reward for its return. Bart then does not want to give a reward. Alan has found Bart’s personal property and is demanding a reward as a pre-condition to its return. Issue The issue in this case is whether under Oregon law, Alan can insist on the reward as a precondition for the return of Bart’s personal property? Rule In MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1 (Or. 1911), MacFarlane, the plaintiff found a pocket book which held $1000 worth of promissory notes belonging to the defendant, Bloch. MacFarlane demanded a reward in return for the pocketbooks return. The defendant refused to pay any reward and had the plaintiff arrested. The plaintiff then filed a suit against the defendant for the reward and won. The court held that the plaintiff had made a “good faith” attempt to find the true owner in trying to return the pocketbook and therefore was entitled to a reward. The courts indicated that offering a reward becomes a contract and once the condition of the reward is met, then the contract would be considered complete and a reward must be given. The court found that if the plaintiff really found and took possession of the goods and believed they were in fact lost, with a purpose to preserve them and return them to the owner, she was in the condition to claim a reward upon complying with the terms of the contract. There essentially is a lien on the property in exchange for the reward. In Watts v. Ward, 1 Ore. 86, 88(Or...
Words: 589 - Pages: 3
...finder of Bart’s lost item before Bart offers a reward. In Contract law a reward offer is binding. In Property law a person has a responsibility to return lost personal property to its rightful owner. Issue: Is Alan entitled to collect a reward before he returns Bart’s object? Rule: MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1 (Or. 1911) In the above mentioned case, one party found a pocketbook with a value of over $1,000.00. The finder made a concerted effort to locate the owner by taking out an ad in the local newspaper in the lost and found section of the classified section. The owner also placed an ad for a reward of $100 for the return of his pocketbook. The founder responded to the ad stating that he was in possession on the lost pocketbook. He was told that he needed to return the pocketbook or he would be arrested for larceny. The finder returned the pocketbook and sued for the reward that the owner placed on the return of the pocketbook. It was stated in this case that “the return of the property completed the contract and the owner was liable to offer reward.” When the reward was offered the finder had a lien for the payment against the property. It makes no difference in eyes of the law if the property was found first or if the reward was advertised first. The reward was for the return of the lost property and not for the actual finding of the object. In this case the owner was obligated to pay the finder the $100.00 reward that was advertised. Wentworth v. Day,...
Words: 609 - Pages: 3
...Bart has mislaid his personal property and is offering a reward for its return. Alan hasfound Bart’s property and is demanding the reward as a pre-condition to its return. ISSUE: The issue in this case is whether Alan can demand the reward as a pre-condition to the return of Bart’s property, under Oregon law. RULES: In MacFarlane v. Bloch, 9 Ore. 1 (Or. 1911), the plaintiff, MacFarlane, found a pocketbook which contained promissory notes worth $1,000 belonging to the defendant, Bloch. Plaintiff withheld the notes demanding the reward be paid before their return. The defendant refused to pay the reward and had the defendant arrested for larceny. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for the reward and prevailed. The state’s highest court found that if the plaintiff had made a good faith attempt to locate the true owner for the purpose of returning the lost property, they would be entitled to the reward. In Watts v. Ward, 1 Ore. 86, 88 (Or. 1854), the plaintiff found horses owned by the defendant, Ward. While being returned to the owners, the finder used the horses for work purposes where they subsequently perished. The plaintiff contended that he was due monetary compensation for the expenses incurred while returning the lost horses to the defendant. The fact that the horses did not survive, the true owner asserted the belief that the finder was not entitled to payment. The instant court found that since a reward was not offered by the defendant...
Words: 392 - Pages: 2
...Assignment #1 Real Property Law Assignment #1 Real Property Issue The issue in this case falls under the State laws applicable in Boring, Oregon. Under the applicable contract law, in cases involving reward offers, the person must pay off the reward. Bart agreed to offer a reward on the return of his lost property. Could Bart be retracted from paying off the reward; as it is Alan’s duty to return the property. Can Alan place a condition for the return. In the light of applicable laws in Boring, Oregon and major court precedents; we would attempt to find probable alternatives that could be imposed by a Court of law. Rule Under the State laws applicable in Boring, Oregon; both the finder of the property and the actual owner possess their rights. According to the Oregon Revised Statues (2012): • The ORS § 98.005 (2011) Title 10 under the Property Rights & Transactions of Abandoned Property. The duties and rights of the owner and the finder of the lost property are enforced under the 98.005 Rights & duties under the Oregon Revised Statues. • The section 489 U.S. 1011, 109 S. Ct. 1120, 103 L. Ed. 2d 183, 1989 under Oregon laws covers the rights of the property owner in cases if the property is misplaced or lost. • The present legislations on Real Property and Contract law clearly hold” that the finder of the lost property must find the actual owner of the property. • The law § 98.005 allows the finder to claim the found property if the owner could...
Words: 946 - Pages: 4
...Re: Alan and Bart: Right to Reward STATEMENT OF FACTS Alan and Bart live in Boring, Oregon. Alan finds an object that belongs to Bart before Bart offers a reward for the return of the object. Under contract law, a reward offer is binding, so that the offeror of a reward must pay a person who completed performance for the offered reward. A person has a responsibility to return lost personal property to its rightful owner. ISSUE The case turns upon the question of whether Alan has the right to withhold the property from Bart pending a reward. APPLICABLE LAW The Supreme Court of Oregon held that it was irrelevant that the finder of lost property did not know about the reward offered for its return at the time of finding it, the court stating that "if the plaintiff really found and took possession of the goods, believing them to be lost, and with a purpose to preserve and return them if possible to the owner, she was in condition to claim the reward, upon complying with its terms." MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1, 4 (Or. 1911). Section 53 of the Tentative Draft of the Second Restatement of the Law of Contracts takes the position that “unless the offeror manifests a contrary intention, an offeree who learns of an offer after he has rendered part of the performance requested by the offer may accept by completing the requested performance.” 86 A.L.R.3d 1142, 5a *There is some case law/statute that is a better second source for this assignment. APPLICATION TO OUR CASE ...
Words: 439 - Pages: 2
...Real Property Essay Re: Bart Vs Alan Facts: Alan found an object belonging to Bart in the state of Oregon. Alan found this object prior to Bart offering a reward for it’s return. Bart now does not want to give the reward to Alan upon the return of the object. Issue: Under Oregon Law, Alan is required to return the object to Bart. Can Alan insist on the reward before returning the object? Rule: In MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1 (Or. 1911) a pocketbook was found by the plaintiff belonging to Bloch. The pocketbook was found prior to Bloch offering a reward for it’s return. The plaintiff asked for the reward as a condition for the return. The defendant refused and had MacFarlane arrested for larceny. The plaintiff returned the pocketbook and was released. The plaintiff proceeded to sue for the reward. The court determined that the reward should be given to MacFarlane, “it was immaterial that she found the book before the offer was made, the reward not being for the finding but for the returning of the book”and “plaintiff complied with this condition of the offer.” Thus, it completed “the contract, making defendant liable for the award.” The court ruled the plaintiff was entitled to the reward and could hold the lost item until the reward was paid. In Watts v. Ward, 1 Ore. 86 (Or. 1854) horses were found by the defendant and an attempt was made to return them to the plaintiff. However, in the process of delivering the horses they were used for driving cattle, hunting...
Words: 497 - Pages: 2
...Validity of reward for return of lost object Relevant Facts Alan finds a lost object belonging to Bart. Alan intends on returning the object to the rightful owner. Bart, after realizing that he lost the object and after Alan finding it, offers a reward for the return of the object. The events have happened in Boring, Oregon. Issue Presented The issue at hand is whether a reward for the return of the object is binding when it’s made after the object has already been found by another person. Applicable Law In Oregon Supreme Court ruling MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1 (Or. 1911), the court has sided with the finder of a lost pocketbook and demanded that the rightful owner pays a reward to the finder, after the pocketbook has been returned. The owner claimed that the pocketbook was found before the rewards has been announced, and that the finder delayed returning to pocketbook. “To entitle plaintiff to a reward for finding a lost pocketbook, it was immaterial that she found the book before the offer was made, the reward not being for the finding but for the return of the book.” MacFarlane, 2. The court decided that it was irrelevant when the offer for reward was made, as the reward is for returning the item to the rightful owner and not for merely finding it. The Oregon Supreme Court has also ruled in Watts v. Ward, 1 Ore. 86, 88 (Or. 1854), that the finder has a right to hold onto the lost property until a reward...
Words: 435 - Pages: 2
...Carrie Allard Real Property Assignment 1 Issue The issue that arises in regards to Alan and Bart’s situation is whether or not Bart is liable to pay the reward he offered for his lost property even though Alan found the property beforehand and may have a pre-existing duty to return the property. Under Oregon law, does Bart have to pay Alan a reward for finding Bart’s lost property before Bart offered the reward? Rule In MacFarlane v. Bloch, 59 Ore. 1, 115 P. 1056, 1911 Ore. LEXIS 98 (Or. 1911), the plaintiff found a pocketbook with promissory notes made out to the defendant owner. At first, the plaintiff did nothing to locate the owner but search the ‘Lost and Found’ section of the paper. The defendant then offered a reward of $100 for the pocketbook to which the plaintiff came forward and the defendant’s agent refused to pay. The court awarded the plaintiff the reward money with Mr Chief Justice Eakin stating, “the finding of the book was not the purpose of the offer,” it was the return of the book and the plaintiff complied. ORS § 98.005 states if a person finds goods or money valued at $250 or more, he or she must give notice in writing to the clerk of the county within 10 days and within 20 days post notice in the general newspaper of the area in which the goods or money was found and if no such owner comes forward in 3 months, the finder is then deemed the owner. Analysis If Alan found Bart’s object, and in good faith, held on to it until he could locate the...
Words: 470 - Pages: 2
...accounting records. 13. True 14. False – the taxpayer needs to waive first his right on the secrecy of bank deposits before BIR can inquire into his bank deposits. 15. True Problem 2 – 2 TRUE OR FALSE 1. False – there must be a Letter of Authority. 2. False – the supporting documents must be submitted to the BIR within 60 days from the date a protest is filed. 3. True 4. True 5. False – destraint as a tax collection method is applicable only to personal property. 6. False – criminal violations already filed in court are not subject to compromise. 7. True 8. False, collection must be within 5 years 9. True 10. False-redemption period is within 1 year from date of auction sale. 11. True 12. True Problem 2 – 3 TRUE OR FALSE 1. False – there is no need to pay additional registration fee for transfer of business registration. 2. True 3. False – the initial bond required for manufacturers and importers of articles subject to excise tax is P100,000. 4. False – informer’s reward is...
Words: 3525 - Pages: 15
... so they become healthy, happy, fully self-actualized individuals.” In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, the company opened several smaller, branded CaboDaySpa sites that offered spa services without the overnight facilities. In 2005, Cabo San Viejo operated five properties; one full-service resort in Palm Springs, CA, and four smaller CaboDaySpa’s in Miami, Hilton Head, Aspen, and Nantucket Island. Cabo San Viejo has been featured in many publications as the best in the world. Cabo San Viejo can accommodate a maximum of 288 guests and expanded to include an air-conditioned, 100,000-square-foot spa complex; 4,200-squar-foot golf performance area; and a 13,000-square-foot Aquatic Center. They have about 3,500 new guests per year: 70-80% of guests are female; 82% of the guest have household income of over $150,000. Cost is the primary reason for why the guests do not return; 67% have heard of the resort by word of mouth. Most common reasons for visiting are rest, relaxation, healthy vacation, spa treatments, and fitness. 96% rate their stay highly, most guests live in western California; average guest takes3-4 vacations per year; 32% of first-time guests return within 5-6 years; and 62% of repeat customers return within another 5-6 years. The summer is the most challenging time of the year and because 59% of guests have less than $150,000 household...
Words: 2355 - Pages: 10
...investing being: interests from savings or dividend paying stocks, cash flow from business or real estate, and appreciation of value from a stock portfolio or other assets. The reason to invest is because it allows the opportunity to greatly increase money over time because the power of compound returns. The earlier an individual begins investing, the more return their will be in the long run. The reason that is true is because money earns interest and the longer there is to contribute more money into the account the interest return will become larger and larger. That should also answer the question of when to start investing; the time is now. So now people may be wondering where do I start investing. Their is a vast amount of investing strategies. Real estate investing makes millionaires, but an investor does not have to be a millionaire to start investing in real estate. There are a couple strategies of real estate investing, either buy property, rent it out and have a consistent cash flow or buy a property when the market is low and hold onto that piece of ground until the market rises again. That is the art of real estate investing, no risk no reward, and the higher the risk the higher the reward. The safest investment is to put money away for retirement, such as a 401(k) account or a Roth IRA. Always remember, how many millionaires are known that have became wealthy from investing in savings accounts. Overall, be prepared to invest in a down market and to get out in a soaring market...
Words: 560 - Pages: 3
...investments in the future. To this end, however, I find Alexander’s plan for the Revere Street property falls short. A major deficiency is that his projections are almost entirely predicated on estimates and assumptions that are neither conservative nor reliable. In a similar vein, Alexander’s “DIY” approach is not only exemplar of naiveté, but also suggestive of many implications that were overlooked in his proposal. And, even more discouraging, a best-case scenario analysis reveals that even without complication, there is little room for error afforded by the plan. Therefore, I would not advise Alexander to move forward with his investment strategy, as its potential for reward is far outweighed by its risk. In a vacuum, Alexander’s proposal would be very feasible and attractive, but in reality the real estate and rental industries are incredibly volatile and hard to predict even for specialists in those fields. The success of Alexander’s proposal is not just contingent upon a host of variables, but variables forecasted by an amateur lacking a sense of conservatism. To begin, the projected costs of the project include no allowance for incidentals. This is a giant red flag. Even if Alexander outsourced certain responsibilities to experts, the likelihood of error and unforeseen costs in bidding for a property, closing the sale, major construction and renovation, and managing a rental property is almost certain. So, without a contingency reserve, the problems are obvious. But even...
Words: 1705 - Pages: 7
...3. Evaluate the flexibility management has available in selecting the key accounting policies. 3.1 Property, Plant and Equipment The PPE of BLD has high flexibility. As PPE is the major part of the total asset, it will affect the total asset strongly when it has any change. Hence the depreciation expenses of these assets have also significant proportion to the total costs of enterprise. According to the final report of BLD, the PPE which include buildings and leasehold property but exclude freehold land are depreciated using the straight-line method. The assets’ residual values, useful lives and amortization methods are reviewed and adjusted at each financial year-end. Therefore, this will create the opportunity for the manager to manipulate the accounting number to make them look more favorable especially when there is a large amount of property, plant and equipment which will be adjusted by end of each year in their useful life exist in this company. 3.2 Revenue recognition The revenue in the company include sale of goods revenue, rendering of services revenue, land development projects and dividends. According to annual report, these revenues recognized strike to accounting policy. In sale, the revenue only recognized when the significant risks and rewards of ownership have been transferred to buyer. In service revenue, the revenue will be recognized when contract is completed. Both of their revenues are recognized when the procedure finished, it could be said that it is...
Words: 562 - Pages: 3
...1. Would investors have benefitted from staying with the Australian share market through 2008 instead of being in the DIP #2 Fund? The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) caused a worldwide drop in stock markets and Australia was no exception. Although not as badly affected as some other developed economies (Brown & Davis 2009, p. 1 of 7), the effect of the GFC was clearly felt in the Australian share market. The following graph of the Australian stock market (S&P/ASX 200) for 2008 illustrates the extent to which the market was affected by the GFC. The stock index, which was at 6353.20 points at the beginning of the year, fell dramatically throughout most of the year, dropping as low as 3352.9 points on November before reaching 3722.3 points on the last day of the year (Yahoo finance 2014). This was a drop of 41.29% in the year 2008, during which time the DIP #2 fund fell 25%. When we compare these two figures, we can see that the DIP #2 fund performed much better compared to the Australian share market, the most likely reason for it being the DIP #2 fund's smart asset allocation and international diversification. While a drop of 25% is not a desirable outcome, it is definitely more preferable to the alternative of a 41.29% drop in value that would have occurred had the investors stayed with the Australian share market. So, not only would the investors have not benefitted, they would have been worse-off by a considerable margin had they stayed with the Australian share market...
Words: 816 - Pages: 4
...Associates, Inc. a property development firm, property development firm purchased an old house near the town square in Concord Falls, where State University is located. The old house was built in the mid-1800s, and Steeley Associates restored it. For almost a decade, Steeley has leased it to the university for academic office space. The house is located on a wide lawn and has become a town landmark. However, in 2003, the lease with the university expired, and Steeley Associates decided to build high-density student apartments on the site, using all the open space. The community was outraged and objected to the town council. The legal counsel for the town spoke with a representative from Steeley and hinted that if Steeley requested a permit, the town would probably reject it. Steeley had reviewed the town building code and felt confident that its plan was within the guidelines, but that did not necessarily mean that it could win a lawsuit against the town to force the town to grant a permit. The principals of Steeley Associates held a series of meetings to review their alternatives. They decided that they had three options: they would request the permit, they could sell the property, or they could request a permit for a low-density office building, which the town had indicated it would not fight. Regarding the last two options, if they sell the house and property, they think they can get $900,000. If they build a new office building, their return will depend on town...
Words: 761 - Pages: 4
