Deck 46: Introduction to Property, Property Insurance, Bailments, and Documents of Title

Question 1

Under an oral agreement, Hyer rented from Bateman a vacant lot for a filling station. Hyer placed on the lot a lightly constructed building bolted to a concrete slab and several storage tanks laid on the ground in a shallow excavation. Later, Hyer prepared a lease which contained a provision allowing him to remove the equipment at the termination of the lease. This lease was not executed, having been rejected by Bateman due to a renewal clause it contained. Several years later, another lease was prepared, which both Hyer and Bateman did sign. This lease did not mention removal of the equipment. At the termination of this lease, Hyer removed the equipment, and Bateman brought an action to recover possession of the equipment. What judgment?

Answer 1

Define a fixture:
Fixture refers to a personal property, which is in connection with a real property. An interest of fixtures takes place under the law of real property. This refers to an attachment that is fixed in a real property such as vehicle or building.
The following are some of the examples of fixtures:
• Electric sockets
• Security alarms
• Satellite dishes
Given scenario:
Person H hired a vacant lot from Person B to use as filling station. This hiring was done by oral agreement. Person H made use of equipment, which he fixed to the ground along with huge tanks.
Years later, an agreement was prepared in which nothing was mentioned about the removal of equipment at the end of lease period. At the end of the lease period, Person H removed the equipment. Person B sued Person H for retaining the possession of the equipment.
Justification:
The given case deals with the owning of fixtures.
Determine the judgment:
It is determined that the judgment will be in the favor of Person H. The equipment belongs to him and therefore he is entitled remove it from the ground without making any damage to the property of Person b.Conclusion:
Person H prevails in the case as the equipment belongs to him. Person B cannot claim for the property, as there are no ethical or legal reasons for doing so.

Question 2

Sears had sold to and installed in the Seven Palms Motor Inn a number of furnishings, including drapes and bedspreads, in connection with the construction of a motel on land Seven Palms owned. Sears did not receive ayment in full for the materials and labor and brought suit to recover $8,357.49, with interest, and to establish a mechanic's lien on the motel and land for the unpaid portion of the furnishings. Seven Palms asserted that neither the drapes nor bedspreads were fixtures and that, thus, Sears could not obtain a mechanic's lien on them. Explain whether the drapes and bedspreads are fixtures.

Answer 2

Define a fixture:
Fixture refers to a personal property, which is in connection with a real property. An interest of fixtures takes place under the law of real property. This refers to an attachment that is fixed in a real property such as vehicle or building.
The following are some of the examples of fixtures:
• Electric sockets
• Security alarms
• Satellite dishes
Justification:
The given case deals with fixtures.
Determine if drapes and bedspreads are fixtures:
It is determined that drapes are fixtures but bedspreads are not considered as fixtures.
Drapes are considered as fixtures as they were hung to the traverse rods that were fixed in the wall. It is fixed in the wall to stimulate the privacy of the guests. It helps in controlling the light in the room. This item has become a part of the motel. Therefore, it is considered as fixture.
Considering bedspreads, it cannot be claimed as fixtures just because they match the color of drapes. In addition, it cannot be used in other places independently. Hence, they are not considered as fixtures.
Conclusion:
Drapes are fixtures but bedspreads are not considered as fixtures.

Question 3

Elvers sold a parcel of real estate, describing it by its legal description and making no mention of any improvements or fixtures on it. The land had upon it a residence, a barn, a rail fence, a stack of hay, some growing corn, and a windmill. The residence had a mirror built into the west wall of the living room and a heating system consisting of a furnace, steam pipes, and coils. In the house were chairs, beds, tables, and other furniture. On the house was a lightning rod. In the basement were screens for the windows. Which of these things passed by the deed and which did not?

Answer 3

Real property:
Real property is a part of tangible property. It is defined as the land and the interests in the land that are attached to the property directly. The examples are land and buildings.
Fixture:
Fixture refers to a personal property, which is in connection with a real property. An interest of fixtures takes place under the law of real property. This refers to an attachment that is fixed in a real property such as vehicle or building. The following are some of the examples of fixtures:
• Electric sockets
• Security alarms
• Satellite dishes
Given scenario:
It is given that Person E sold a real estate just telling about its legal description. He did not mention about the fixtures. However, it contained many items such as the follows:
• Rail fence
• Corn (in the stage of growing)• Residence with heating system (furnace, coils, and steam pipes), lightning rod, and mirror
• Some furniture and screen of window in the residence
• Barn
• Stack of hay
• Windmill
Justification:
The given case deals with the owning of real property and fixtures.
Determine the things passed by the deed:
To the purchaser of the real estate, the following things would pass:
• Residence
• Windmill
• Heating system along with the parts
• Fence
• Corn in the stage of its growth
• Panel mirror
• Barn
• Lightning rod
• Window screens
• Growing crops
The purchaser of the real estate will own the above-mentioned things as all the items are connected with the real estate.
The following things will not pass by the deed of sale:
• Stack of hay
• Chairs
• Bed
• Tables
• Other furniture
The purchaser cannot own the above things, as they are all a part of personal property of Person E.
Conclusion:
Hence, the things that are passed and not passed by the deed are explained as above.

Question 4

David E. Ross, his two brothers, and their families operated and owned the entire stock of five businesses. Ross had three children: Rod, David II, and Betsy. David II and Betsy were not involved in the operation of the companies, but Rod began working for one of the firms, Equitable Life and Casualty Insurance Company, in 2007. Between 2009 and 2013, the elder Ross informed a number of persons of his desire to reward Rod for his work with Equitable Life by giving him stock in addition to the stock he would inherit. He subsequently executed several stock transfers to Rod, representing shares in various family businesses, which were reflected by appropriate entries on the corporate books. Certificates were issued in Rod's name and placed in an envelope identified with the name Rod Ross, but they were kept with the other family stock certificates in an office safe to which Rod did not have access. In all, one-fourth of the stock holdings of David E. Ross were transferred to Rod in this manner. This fact is consistent with the elder Ross's expressed intention that Rod should ultimately receive a total of one-half of the stock upon his father's death. David E. died in April 2013. His will divided the estate equally among the three children and made no reference to prior gifts of stock to Rod. David II and Betsy brought an action contesting the validity of the stock transfers. Are the inter vivos gifts of the stock valid? Explain.

Question 5

John Swan rented a safe deposit box at the Tenth Citizens Bank of Emanon, State of X. On December 17, 2011, Swan went to the bank with stock certificates to place in the safe deposit box. After he was admitted to the vault and had placed the stock certificates in the box, Swan found lying on a chair in the privacy booth of the vault a $5,000 negotiable bearer bond issued by the State of Wisconsin with coupons attached, due June 30, 2018. Swan picked up the bond and, observing that it did not carry the name of the owner, left the vault and went to the office of the president of the bank. He told the president what had occurred and delivered the bond to the president only after obtaining his promise that, should the owner not call for the bond or become known to the bank by June 30, 2012, the bank would redeliver the bond to Swan. On July 1, 2012, Swan learned that the owner of the bond had not called for it, nor was his identity known to the bank. Swan then asked that the bond be returned to him. The bank refused, stating that it would continue to hold the bond until the owner claimed it. Explain whether Swan will prevail in his action to recover possession of the bond.

Question 6

Laval was a patient of Dr. Leopold, a practicing psychiatrist. Dr. Leopold shared an office with two associates practicing in the same field. No receptionist or other employee attended the office. Mrs. Laval placed her coat in the clothes closet in the office reception room. Later, when she returned to retrieve the coat to leave, she found it missing. Is Dr. Leopold liable to Mrs. Laval for the value of her coat? Explain.

Question 7

Lile, an insurance broker who handled all insurance for Tempo Co., purchased a fire policy from Insurance Company insuring Tempo Co.'s factory against fire in the amount of $1.5 million. Before the policy was delivered to Tempo and while it was still in Lile's hands, Tempo advised Lile to cancel the policy. Prior to cancellation, however, Tempo suffered a loss. Tempo now makes a claim against Insurance Company on the policy. The premium had been billed to Lile but was unpaid at the time of loss. In an action by Tempo Co. against Insurance Company, what judgment?

Question 8

Sewall left his car in a parking lot owned by Fitz-In Auto Parks, Inc. The lot was approximately one hundred by two hundred feet in size and had a chain link fence along the rear boundary to separate the lot from a facility of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Although the normal entrance and exit were located at the front of the lot, it was also possible to leave by way of small side streets on either side of the lot. Upon entering the lot, the driver would pay the attendant on duty a fee of $5.00 to park. The attendant's duties were limited to collecting money from patrons and directing them to parking spaces. Ordinarily, the attendant remained on duty until 11:00 A.M., after which time the lot was left unattended. Furthermore, a patron could remove his car from the lot at any time without interference by any employee of the parking lot. On the morning of April 15, Sewall entered the lot, paid the $5.00 fee, parked his car in a space designated by the attendant, locked it, and took the keys with him. This was a routine he had followed for several years. When he returned to the unattended lot that evening, however, he found that his car was gone, apparently having been stolen by an unidentified third person. Is Fitz-Inn, the owner of the lot, liable for the value of the car? Why?

Question 9

On July 15, Adler purchased in Chicago a Buick sedan, intending to drive it that day to St. Louis, Missouri. He telephoned a friend, Maruchek, who was in the insurance business, and told him that he wanted liability insurance on the automobile, limited in amount to $50,000 for injuries to one person and to $100,000 for any one accident. Maruchek took the order and told Adler over the telephone that he was covered and that his policy would be written by the Young Insurance Company. Later that same day and before Maruchek had informed the Young Insurance Company of Adler's application, Adler negligently operated the automobile and seriously injured Brown, who brings suit against Adler. Is Adler covered by liability insurance?

Question 10

Mieske delivered thirty-two fifty-foot reels of developed movie film to the Bartell Drug Company to be spliced together into four reels for viewing convenience. She placed the films, which contained irreplaceable pictures of her family's activities over a period of years, into the order in which they were to be spliced and then delivered them to the manager of Bartell. The manager placed a film-processing packet on the bag of films and gave Mrs. Mieske a receipt that stated, "We assume no responsibility beyond retail cost of film unless otherwise agreed to in writing." Although the disclaimer was not discussed, Mrs. Mieske's parting words to the store manager were, "Don't lose these. They are my life." Bartell sent the film to its processing agent, GAF Corporation, which intended to send them to another processing lab for splicing. While at the GAF laboratory, however, the film was accidentally placed in the garbage dumpster and was never recovered. Upon learning of the loss of their film, the Mieskes brought action to recover damages from Bartell and GAF. The defendants argued that their liability was limited to the cost of the unexposed film. Are GAF or Bartell liable to the Mieskes? If so, for how much?

Question 11

Graham owns a building having a fair market value of $120,000. She takes out a fire insurance policy from the Bentley Insurance Company for $72,000; the policy contains an 80 percent co-insurance clause. The building is damaged by fire to the extent of $48,000. How much insurance is Graham entitled to collect?

Question 12

Plaintiff, Heath Benjamin (Benjamin), found more than $18,000 in currency inside the wing of an airplane. At the time of this discovery, State Central Bank (State) owned the plane and it was being serviced by Lindner Aviation, Inc. (Lindner). Benjamin at the time was employed by Lindner and was conducting a routine annual inspection of the plane. As part of the inspection, Benjamin removed panels from the underside of the wings. Although these panels were to be removed annually as part of the routine inspection, a couple of the screws holding the panel on the left wing were so rusty that Benjamin had to use a drill to remove them. Benjamin testified that the panel probably had not been removed for several years. Inside the left wing Benjamin discovered two packets approximately four inches high and wrapped in aluminum foil. He removed the packets from the wing and took off the foil wrapping. Inside the foil was approximately $18,000, tied in string and wrapped in handkerchiefs. The money was evetually turned over to the Keokuk police department. No one came forward within twelve months claiming to be the true owner of the money. Explain who is entitled to receive the money.

Question 13

Phil was the owner of a herd of twenty highly bred dairy cows. He was a prosperous farmer, but his health was very poor. On the advice of his doctor, Phil decided to winter in Arizona. Before he left, he made an agreement with Freya under which Freya was to keep the cows on Freya's farm through the winter, be paid the sum of $800 by Phil, and return to Phil the twenty cows at the close of the winter. For reasons that Freya thought made good farming sense, Freya sold six of the cows and replaced them with six other cows. After winter was over, Phil returned from Arizona. Is Freya liable for conversion of the original six cows? Why?

Question 14

Calvin Klein, Ltd. (Calvin Klein), a New York clothing company, had used the services of Trylon Trucking Corporation (Trylon) for more than three years, involving hundreds of shipments, prior to the lost shipment at issue. After completing each carriage, Trylon would forward to Calvin Klein an invoice that contained a limitation of liability provision. The provision stated, "In consideration of the rate charged, the shipper agrees that the carrier shall not be liable for more than $50.00 on any shipment accepted for delivery to one consignee unless a greater value is declared, in writing, upon receipt at time of shipment and charge for such greater value paid, or agreed to be paid, by shipper." On April 2, Trylon dispatched its driver Jamahl Jefferson to the J.F.K. International Airport to pick up 2,833 blouses sent from Hong Kong, China, to Calvin Klein. The driver disappeared, stealing both the truck and the blouses. Calvin Klein sued Trylon for the full value of the blouses. Does the limitation of liability provision extend to the shipment? Explain.

Question 15

Hines stored her furniture, including a grand piano, in Arnett's warehouse. Needing more space, Arnett stored Hines's piano in Butler's warehouse next door. As a result of a fire, which occurred without any fault of Arnett or Butler, both warehouses and their contents were destroyed. Is Arnett liable to Hines for the value of her piano and furniture? Explain.

Question 16

In January, Roger Burke loaned his favorite nephew, Jimmy White, his valuable Picasso painting. Knowing that Jimmy would celebrate his twenty-first birthday on May 15, Burke sent a letter to Jimmy on April 14 stating:
Dear Jimmy,
Tomorrow I leave on my annual trip to Europe, and I want to make you a fitting birthday gift, which I do by sending you my enclosed promissory note. Also I want you to keep the Picasso that I loaned you last January, and you may now consider it yours. Happy birthday!
Affectionately,
/s/ Uncle Roger
The negotiable promissory note for $5,000 sent with the letter was signed by Roger Burke, payable to Jimmy White or bearer, and dated May 15. On May 21, Burke was killed in an automobile accident while motoring in France.
First Bank was appointed administrator of Burke's estate. Jimmy presented the note to the administrator and demanded payment, which was refused. Jimmy brought an action against First Bank as administrator, seeking recovery on the note. The administrator in turn brought an action against Jimmy, seeking the return of the Picasso.
a. What decision in the action on the note?
b. What decision in the action to recover the painting?

Question 17

Curtis rented a safe deposit box from Reliable Safe Deposit Company, in which he deposited valuable securities and $4,000 in cash. Later, after opening the box and discovering $1,000 missing, Curtis brought an action against Reliable. At the trial, the company showed that its customary procedure was as follows: that there were two keys for each box furnished to each renter; that if a key was lost, the lock was changed; that new keys were provided for each lock each time a box was rented; that there were two clerks in charge of the vault; and that one of the clerks was always present to open the box. Reliable Safe Deposit Company also proved that two keys were given to Curtis at the time he rented his box; that his box could not be opened without the use of one of the keys in his possession; and that the company had issued no other keys to Curtis's box. Explain whether Reliable is obligated to pay Curtis for the missing $1,000.

Question 18

The plaintiffs are public utilities providing telecommunications services in New Hampshire. The plaintiffs commenced separate actions for abatement of real estate taxes ag ainst sixteenmunicipalities. The plaintiffs disputed the defendants' treatment of its communications equipment as real estate, thereby challenging their authority to tax its equipment. The communications equipment at issue involves two basic categories: (1) distribution plant, which includes telephone poles, wires, and underground conduits; and (2) central office equipment, consisting of frames, switches, and other power equipment.
The plaintiffs submitted affidavits setting forth the following facts. All of the plaintiffs' poles, wires, and underground conduits located in the municipalities are placed either on public rights of way or on private property owned by third parties. Approximately 90 percent of the poles are located on public rights of way pursuant to licenses issued by the state or the municipalities. The remaining 10 percent of the poles are placed on private property either by consent of the property owner or pursuant to an easement. The poles, wires, and underground conduits are installed in a manner that permits and facilitates their removal and relocation. Consequently, removal of that equipment is neither complicated nor time consuming, and does not harm the underlying land or change its usefulness. The plaintiffs remove and relocate their poles, wires, and underground conduits at the request of the state or the applicable private landowner or municipality. In obtaining the licenses, consents, or easements for their poles, wires, and underground conduits, the plaintiffs insiston maintaining ownership of that equipment and refuse any requests to make the equipment a permanent part of the realty. The plaintiffs' central office equipment, most of which is located in buildings owned by the plaintiffs, is both portable and designed to permit removal and relocation. The plaintiffs' practice and policy is to move pieces of central office equipment among buildings in response to changes in technology or system use. Although certain frames are bolted to the buildings, their removal is achieved without affecting the usefulness of the buildings or the frames themselves. When the plaintiffs ultimately vacate a building used as a central office, they remove all of their equipment and merely transfer the building "as a shell." The vacated building, though devoid of central office equipment, retains utility for other commercial or professional uses. The defendants did not dispute the specific facts set forth by the plaintiffs
a. What are the arguments that the property is not real property and therefore not subject to taxation by the municipalities?
b. What are the arguments that the property is real property and can be taxed by the municipalities?
c. Who is correct? Explain.?

Question 19

A, B, and C each stored five thousand bushels of yellow corn in the same bin in X's warehouse. X wrongfully sold ten thousand bushels of this corn to Y. A contends that inasmuch as his five thousand bushels of corn were placed in the bin first, the remaining five tho usandbushels belong to him. What are the rights of the parties?

Question 20

Several years ago, Pierce purchased a tract of land on which stood an old, vacant house. Recently, Pierce employed Fried, a carpenter, to repair and remodel the house. While Fried was tearing out a partition to enlarge one of the rooms, he found a metal box hidden in the wall. After breaking open the box and discovering that it contained $2,000 in gold and silver coins and old-style bills, Fried took the box and its contents to Pierce and told her where he had found it. When Fried handed the box and the money over to Pierce, he said, "If you do not find the owner, I claim the money." Pierce placed the money in an envelope and deposited it in her safe deposit box, where it presently remains. No one has ever claimed the money, but Pierce refuses to give it to Fried. Will Fried be able to recover the money from Pierce? Why?

Question 21

On April 1, Mary Rich, at the solicitation of Super Fur Company, delivered a $13,000 mink coat to the company at its place of business for storage in its vaults until November 1. On the same day, she paid the company its customary charge of $50.00 for such storage. After Mary left the store, the general manager of the company, on finding that its storage vaults were already filled to capacity, delivered Mary's coat to Swift Trucking Company for shipment to Fur Storage Company. En route, the truck in which Mary's coat was being transported was badly damaged by fire caused by the driver's negligence, and Mary's coat was totally destroyed. Is Super Fur Company liable to Mary for the value of her coat? Why?
b. Would your answer be the same if Mary's coat had been safely delivered to Fur Storage Company and had been stolen from the company's storage vaults without negligence on its part? Why?

Question 22

Gable, the owner of a lumber company, was cutting trees over the boundary line between his property and property owned by Lane. Although he realized he had crossed onto Lane's property, Gable continued to cut trees of the same kind as those he had cut on his own land. While on Lane's property, he found a diamond ring on the ground, which he took home. All of the timber Gable cut that day was commingled. What are Lane's rights, if any (a) in the timber and (b) in the ring?

Question 23

Rich, a club member, left his golf clubs with Bogan, the pro at the Happy Hours Country Club, to be refinished at Bogan's pro shop. The refinisher employed by Bogan suddenly left town, taking Rich's clubs with him. The refinisher had previously been above suspicion, although Bogan had never checked on the man's character references. A valuable sand wedge that Bogan had borrowed from another member, Smith, for his own use in an important tournament was also stolen by the refinisher, as well as several pairs of golf shoes that Bogan had checked for members without charge as an accommodation.The club members concerned each made claims against Bogan for their losses. Can (a) Rich, (b) Smith, and (c) the other members compel Bogan to make good their respective losses?

Question 24

Decide each of the following problems:
a. A chimney sweep found a jewel and took it to a goldsmith, whose apprentice removed the stone and refused to return it. The chimney sweep sues the goldsmith.?
b. One of several boys walking along a railroad track found an old stocking. All started playing with it until it burst in the hands of its discoverer, revealing several hundred dollars. The original discoverer claims all of the money; the other boys claim it should be divided equally.?
c. A traveling salesperson leaving a store notices a parcel of bank notes on the floor. He picks them up and gives them to the owner of the store to keep for the true owner. After three years, they have not been reclaimed, and the salesperson sues the storekeeper.?
d. Frank is hired to clean the swimming pool at the country club. He finds a diamond ring on the bottom of the pool. The true owner cannot be found. The country club sues Frank for possession of the ring. e. A customer found a pocketbook lying on a barber's table. He gave it to the barber to hold for the true owner, who failed to appear. The customer sues the barber.?

Question 25

Donna drove an automobile into Terry's garage and requested him to make repairs for which the charge would be $125. Donna, however, never returned to get the automobile. Two months later, Carla saw the automobile in Terry's garage and claimed it as her own, asserting that it had been stolen from her. Terry told Carla that she could have the automobile if she paid for the repairs and storage. One week later, Molly appeared and proved that the automobile was hers, that it had been stolen from her, and that neither Donna nor Carla had any rights in it. Discuss whether Terry is liable for conversion of the automobile.

Question 26

Jones had fifty crates of oranges equally divided between grades A, B, and C, grade A being the highest quality and C being the lowest. Smith had one thousand crates of oranges, about 90 percent of which were grade A, but some of which were grades B and C, the exact percentage of each being unknown. Smith willfully mixed Jones's crates with his own so that it was impossible to identify any particular crate. Jones seized the whole lot. Smith demanded nine hundred crates of grade A and fifty crates each of grades B and C. Jones refused to give them up unless Smith could identify particular crates. This Smith could not do. Smith brought an action against Jones to recover what he demanded or its value. Judgment for whom, and why?

Question 27

On June 1, Cain delivered his 2010 automobile to Barr, the operator of a repair shop, for necessary repairs. Barr put the car in his lot on Main Street. The lot, which is fenced on all sides except along Main Street, holds one hundred cars and is unguarded at night, although the police make periodic checks. The lot is well lighted. The cars do not have the keys in them when left out overnight. At some time during the night of June 4, the hood, starter, alternator, and gearshift were stolen from Cain's car. The car remained on the lot, and during the evening of June 5, the transmission was stolen from the car. Did Barr exercise due care in taking care of the automobile?

Question 28

Barnes, the owner and operator of Blackacre, decided to cease farming operations and liquidate his holdings. Barnes sold fifty head of yearling Merino sheep to Billing and then sold Blackacre to Clifton. He executed and delivered to Billing a bill of sale for the sheep and was paid for them. It was understood that Billing would send a truck for the sheep within a few days. At the same time, Barnes executed a warranty deed conveying Blackacre to Clifton. Clifton took possession of the farm and brought along one hundred head of his yearling Merino sheep and turned them into the pasture, not knowing the sheep Barnes sold Billing were still in the pasture. After the sheep were mixed, it was impossible to identify the fifty head belonging to Billing. Explain whether Billing will recover the fifty head of sheep from Clifton.

Question 29

Seton in Phoenix, according to a contract with Rider in New York, ships to Rider goods conforming to the contract and takes from the carrier a shipper's order bill of lading that Seton indorses in blank and forwards by mail to Clemson, his agent in New York, with instructions to deliver the bill of lading to Rider on receipt of payment of the price for the goods. Forest, a thief, steals the bill of lading from Clemson and transfers it for value to Pace, a bona fide purchaser. Before the goods arrive in New York, Rider is insolvent. What are the rights of the parties?

Question 30

Susan permitted Kevin to take her very old grandfather clock on the basis of Kevin's representations that he was skilled at repairing such clocks and restoring them to their original condition and could do the job for $60.00. The clock had been badly damaged for years. Kevin immediately sold the clock to Fixit Shop for $30.00. Fixit Shop was in the business of repairing a large variety of items and also sold used articles. Three months later, Susan was in the Fixit Shop and clearly identified a grandfather clock Fixit Shop had for sale as the one she had given Kevin to repair. Fixit Shop had replaced more than half of the moving parts by having exact duplicates custom-made; the clock's exterior had been restored by a skilled cabinetmaker; and the clock's face had been replaced by a duplicate. All materials belonged to Fixit Shop, and its employees accomplished the work. Fixit Shop asserts it bought the clock in the normal course of business from Kevin, who represented that it belonged to him. The fair market value of the clock in its damaged condition was $30.00, and the value of repairs made is $220. Susan sued Fixit Shop for return of the clock. Fixit Shop defended that it then had title to the clock and, in the alternative, that Susan must pay the value of the repairs if she is entitled to regain possession. Who will prevail? Why

Question 31

Scarola purchased an automobile for value and without knowledge that it was stolen. After he insured the car with Insurance Company of North America (INA) the car was stolen once again. When INA refused to reimburse Scarola for the loss, contending that he did not have an insurable interest in the car, Scarola brought an action. Did Scarola have an insurable interest in the automobile? Why?