Skip to main content

If You Buy A Rolex That Was Stolen (But You Didn't Know), Do You Have Legal Ownership Of It?

Interesting case from New York County Civil Court (a kind of small claims court). I don't have access to the court filings (none of them were e-filed), just a short summary from the New York Law Journal (pay wall).

But based on that short article, this appears to be what happened: dealer/jeweler Choraria sells Rolex watches. In 2007, the subject watch was stolen from him. At some point between 2007 and 2017, another dealer/jeweler, Jeffrey Bouvier, bought the watch (from somebody). I assume Bouvier didn't know the watch had been stolen, and we have no idea how many times it passed hands before it was eventually sold to Bouvier. Thus, Bouvier would be a "good faith" purchaser.

It turns out the watch was damaged. So, Bouvier innocently enough sends the watch off to Rolex to be repaired. Rolex runs a search of the watch's serial number and learns it had been reported stolen back in 2007.

Choraria says the watch belongs to him because it had been stolen. Bouvier argues no, the watch belongs to him, he bought it fair and square. Rolex doesn't know what to do, so it brings an interpleader action in court to say here is the situation, we don't know who the watch should belong to, so you, judge, decide.

The judge declared that Choraria was the rightful owner of the watch because Bouvier could not lawfully acquire title/ownership of a stolen watch. The guy who originally stole the watch could never pass legal title to anyone else.

Rolex apparently has to bring these kinds of actions every now and then. Here is a decision from a 2009 case.

So, Choraria gets his watch back, 10 years later, and after paying a lawyer, but Bouvier is out the money he paid for the watch and the watch. Only the watch thief comes out a winner in this situation.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Insurance Companies Trying to Gag Superstorm Sandy Victims?

As reported in several news articles ( this one  is free), in the aftermath of superstorm Sandy, engineering firms were hired by insurance companies to inspect the homes of people making claims for flood damage.  There have been allegations that two of the engineering firms, U.S. Forensic out of Louisiana, and GEB HiRise out of Uniondale, forged property damage reports in order to deny claims. The NY State Attorney General is investigating those allegations and wants to talk to the homeowners.  At the same time, there are about 1,800 lawsuits in federal court involving the insurance coverage claims. A three-judge panel is trying to expedite resolution of the cases.  Last week it was revealed that one of the insurance companies, The Standard Fire Insurance Company, which is a subsidiary of Travelers Insurance, drafted language in a settlement document saying that any homeowner who accepts a payout of their claims cannot cooperate with the criminal invest...
Post a Comment
Read more

Recent Cases: Appeals Court Reverses Lower Court in Slip and Fall

In a decision issued on March 18, 2015 , a New York appeals court reversed a lower court decision dismissing a slip and fall case. The plaintiff was a 12-year-old boy. He was injured when he slipped and fell on "loose and broken pieces of asphalt" as he was running towards an ice cream truck near an Ikea store in Brooklyn. There were two interesting things about the decision. First, like many slip and fall cases, the case turned on constructive notice--how long was the loose/broken asphalt on the ground before the accident so that the defendants should have seen it and corrected the dangerous condition? The appeals court said the defendants failed to show when they last cleaned or inspected the area, so they did not establish lack of constructive notice. The more interesting thing is that apparently the boy told staff at the hospital where he was taken that he tripped over his shoelaces. The defendants found this in the hospital records and basically said, "Ha! He di...
Post a Comment
Read more

Consumer Law Update: FTC sues DIRECTV for Deceptive Business Practices

I'm sure most people think that "of course" big businesses are constantly, intentionally, ripping people off and are engaged in deceptive business practices. As a lawyer, my inclination is I can't believe a big business, with lots of executives and lots of lawyers looking things over, could possibly offer promos or services that are so misleading or deceptive that they are illegal. They can't possibly be that dumb. Sometimes I'm wrong. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission has sued DIRECTV in San Francisco federal court for engaging in deceptive and misleading business practices in violation of federal law. DIRECTV was telling consumers, hey, look at our low monthly rates and look at all the great stuff you get, come sign up with us! However, DIRECTV failed to adequately disclose that, oh, by the way, in order to get that great deal, you have to sign a two-year contract; those low rates are only good for the first year; your monthly bill could go ...
Post a Comment
Read more