1. ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #14 (Extendo-Class) Friday, September 25, 2015

2. MUSIC: BRAHMS Cello Sonatas (1862, 1886) Mstislav Rostropovich, Cello Rudolph Serkin, Piano Recording: 1983URANIUM Written Brief #1 (Kesler v. Jones) due Tomorrow @ 8 pm See Instructions for Written Assignments & Case Briefs (IM21-22) Intro to Exam Software in DF Session TODAY @ 11:00 ROOM F309

3. OXYGEN MANNING: From Facts to Relevant Factors (cont’d) DQ1.46 & Broader & Narrower Holdings featuring OXYGEN

4. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) We’ll discuss the possible significance of each fact, including… Fact Factor  How Might You Broaden a Particular Fact to a More General Factor? (to imagine what might be part of broader versions of holding)  Why Might that Factor Matter in Determining Rights between OO and Finder? (to clarify purpose/relevance)  How Well Does the Particular Fact Further the Purposes of Considering the General Factor ? (to assess the relative importance of the fact and prepare to compare it to facts of future cases/problems)

5. Manning v. Mitcherson : FACTS & HOLDING The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [canary]  [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest]  [that was marked] [that responded to its name] [that had escaped and returned once before] [that had been owned for two years] [that had been missing for only five days] [that OO located day after it was found]

6. Manning v. Mitcherson : FACTS & HOLDING The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [canary]  [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest]  [that was marked] [( maintained by OO) ]  [that was tamed/had emotional bond to OO] [that responded to its name] [that had escaped and returned once before] [that had been owned for two years] [that had been missing for only five days] [that OO located day after it was found]

7. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) Possible Significance of … Responded to name + Prior escape/return  tamed or bonded Shows labor by OO (or prior owner) May want to protect emotional connection How well does responding to name do these things here? Amount of labor/connection depends on type of bird.

8. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) Possible Significance of … Responded to name + Prior escape/return  tamed or bonded Shows labor by OO (or prior owner) May want to protect emotional connection How well does prior escape/return do these things here?

9. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) Possible Significance of … responded to name + Prior escape/return  tamed or bonded Shows labor by OO (or prior owner) May want to protect emotional connection How well does prior escape/return do these things here?

10. Manning v. Mitcherson : FACTS & HOLDING canaryanimal ferae naturae The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [canary]  [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest]  [that was marked] + [( maintained by OO) ] + [that had escaped and returned once before] +  + [that responded to its name]  [that was tamed/had emotional bond to OO] [that had been owned for two years] [that had been missing for only five days] [that OO located day after it was found]

11. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) The original owner retains property rights in an escaped animal ferae naturae … Note Three Different Measures of Time [that had been owned for two years] [that had been missing for only five days] [that OO located day after it was found]

12. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) Possible Significance of … that had been owned for two years  – Taming/Bonding again – Maybe stronger than name or escape/return: More labor by OO (2 years maintenance) Emotional connection probably strong

13. Manning v. Mitcherson : FACTS & HOLDING The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [canary]  [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest]  [that was marked] [that had escaped and returned once before] + [that responded to its name] + [that had been owned for two years]  [that was tamed & emotionally bonded to OO] [that had been missing for only five days] [that OO located day after it was found]

14. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) The original owner retains property rights in an escaped animal ferae naturae … that had been missing for only five days that OO located day after it was found Possible Significance? – Possible more general factor? – Why might matter to rights of OO/F?

15. OXYGEN Manning v. Mitcherson : DQ 1.46 Relevant Factors ( OXYGEN ) Possible Significance of … missing only five days/OO located day after found  Gone very short time Shows pursuit/interest by OO Little time for F to invest or bond How well does time here show these things?

16. Manning v. Mitcherson : FACTS & HOLDING The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [canary]  [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest]  [that was marked] [prior escape/return] + [responded to name] + [owned for two years]  [that was tamed & emotionally bonded to OO] [that had been missing for only five days] + [that OO located day after it was found]  [that had been gone for a short time]

17. Manning v. Mitcherson : VERSIONS OF HOLDING Version #1: The original owner retains property rights in an escaped bird that had – escaped and returned before, – is distinctively marked, – had been found only a short time after it escaped, and – was located by the owner a short time after being found.

18. Manning v. Mitcherson : VERSIONS OF HOLDING Version #2: The original owner retains property rights in an escaped animal ferae naturae that is – tamed and – distinctively marked.

19. Manning v. Mitcherson : VERSIONS OF HOLDING Version #3: The original owner retains property rights in an escaped animal ferae naturae where – the OO is emotionally bonded to the animal and – locates the animal after it only is gone for a short time.

20. Manning v. Mitcherson : MANY VERSIONS OF HOLDING Exact scope of Manning holding necessarily unclear until Ga. Supreme Court clarifies. Use other language from case to help determine best alternatives (DQ1.45 & 1.47). Use squirrel hypothetical to see how different versions might accomplish different results (DQ1.48) QUESTIONS ON FACTORS & HOLDING?

21. Relevant Language ( DQ 1.45 & DQ 1.47 & Rationales ) featuring ME & OXYGEN MINING the MEANING of MANNING Relevant Language ( DQ 1.45 & DQ 1.47 & Rationales ) featuring ME & OXYGEN

22. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 The law of Georgia is, that to have property in animals, birds and fishes which are wild by nature, one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them. (Top p.40) POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANCE TO COURT’S REASONING?

23. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 The law of Georgia is, that to have property in animals, birds and fishes which are wild by nature, one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them. Could simply go to 1 st possession and mean that Mitcherson owned bird prior to escape. Could mean, “Once tamed, yours forever”, BUT structure of opinion suggests otherwise.

24. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : Taming Enough ? (p.40 2d para): …the bird in controversy was shown to have been tamed. It was also testified that …

25. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : Taming Enough ? …the bird … was … tamed. It was also testified that it had been in the possession of the plaintiff in the warrant about two years; that it knew its name, and when called by its owner, would answer the call; that it had left its cage on one occasion, and after having been gone a day or two returned; that on the 27th day of December, before the preceding new year's day, it was missing from its cage, and on the latter day it was received and taken possession of by the defendant …

26. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : Taming Enough ? …the bird … was … tamed. It was also testified that in the possession of the plaintiff about two years; knew & would answer to its name; prior escape & return; Caught and given to defendant 5 days after escape ¶ Under this evidence, there does not seem to be any question of sufficient possession and dominion over this bird, to create a property right in the plaintiff.

27. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45: OXYGEN The law of Georgia is, that to have property in animals, birds and fishes which are wild by nature, one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them. Could mean, “Once tamed, yours forever”, BUT if holding is that simple, court probably would just say so and NOT list all the other evidence.

28. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 To have property in animals ferae naturae, “one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them.” Present tense acquire maintain living wild animal. Present tense suggests this is not a rule for when you acquire property rights, but a rule about how you maintain property lights in a living wild animal.

29. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 To have property in animals ferae naturae, “one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them.” Present tense suggests this is not a rule for when you acquire property rights, but a rule about how you maintain property lights in a living wild animal. lost her property rights D must have argued that P lost her property rights because she no longer had the bird within her “actual possession, custody or control.”

30. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 To have property in animals ferae naturae, “one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them.” lost her property rights D must have argued that P lost her property rights because she no longer had the bird within her “actual possession, custody or control.” The Court rejected that argument: “Under this evidence, there does not seem to be any question of sufficient possession and dominion over this bird, to create a property right in the plaintiff.

31. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45 & Possible Doctrinal Rationale To have property in animals ferae naturae, “one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them.” Defendant seems to have argued that P lost her property rights because she no longer had the bird within her “actual possession, custody or control.” However, the court held that the totality of the evidence here showed that she retained “sufficient possession and dominion over [the] bird” to still have property rights.

32. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.45: OXYGEN The law of Georgia is, that to have property in animals, birds and fishes which are wild by nature, one must have them within his actual possession, custody or control, and this he may do by taming, domesticating, or confining them. Interesting idea from Fall 2012 that OO retains ownership if sufficient evidence remains of taming, domesticating or confining. Could Finder here tell that bird had been tamed and/or confined?

33. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN To say that if one has a canary bird, mocking bird, parrot, or any other bird so kept and it should accidentally escape from its cage to the street, or to a neighboring house, that the first person who caught it would be its owner, is wholly at variance with our views of right and justice. (p.40 last para.) For Sweet, probably not an accident! Court probably means owner did not deliberately allow bird to fly free.

34. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN To say that if one has a canary bird, mocking bird, parrot, or any other bird so kept and it should accidentally escape from its cage to the street, or to a neighboring house, that the first person who caught it would be its owner, is wholly at variance with our views of right and justice. Likely true here; if so, why relevant?

35. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN To say that if one has a canary bird, mocking bird, parrot, or any other bird so kept and it should accidentally escape from its cage to the street, or to a neighboring house, that the first person who caught it would be its owner, is wholly at variance with our views of right and justice. Possible Relevance of Street/Neighbor House: – Only a short distance from point of escape? – Not returned to natural habitat/liberty? (although court doesn’t use this language) – Finders might be aware of prior claim – OO might be able to recapture easily

36. Manning v. Mitcherson : Might add Distance to HOLDING : The original owner retains property rights in an escaped [animal ferae naturae] [that had distinctive crest][that responded to its name] [that had escaped and returned once before] [that had been owned for two years][that had been missing for only five days][that OO located day after it was found] [that only traveled a short distance after escape]

37. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN ( p.40 last para.) To say that if one has a canary bird, mocking bird, parrot, or any other bird so kept and it should accidentally escape from its cage to the street, or to a neighboring house, that the first person who caught it would be its owner, is wholly at variance with our views of right and justice. WHY? This is unsupported rhetoric. You need to do better. More explanation = More Persuasive = More Points

38. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN To say that if one has a canary bird, mocking bird, parrot, or any other bird so kept and it should accidentally escape from its cage to the street, or to a neighboring house, that the first person who caught it would be its owner, is wholly at variance with our views of right and justice. WHY? MAYBE: Unfair to OO; too close in time and distance to lose rights (protect emotional & material investment) MAYBE: Finder should know that there is prior OO, so shouldn’t keep it MAYBE BOTH PLAUSIBLE ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT: Court is concerned that OO not have to over-invest in confinement (Canary Alcatraz) to maintain ownership. Cf. Shaw.

39. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47 OXYGEN ( p.40 last para.) To hold that the traveling organist with his attendant monkey, if it should slip its collar, and go at will out of his immediate possession and control, and be captured by another person, that he would be the true owner and the organist lose all claim to it, is hardly to be expected; or that the wild animals of a menagerie, should they escape from their owner's immediate possession, would belong to the first person who should subject them to his dominion. Again looks like short time/distance relevant.

40. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN ( p.40 last para.) To hold that the traveling organist with his attendant monkey, if it should slip its collar, and go at will out of his immediate possession and control, and be captured by another person, that he would be the true owner and the organist lose all claim to it, is hardly to be expected; or that the wild animals of a menagerie, should they escape from their owner's immediate possession, would belong to the first person who should subject them to his dominion. WHAT IS A MENAGERIE?

41. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN Animals Referenced in Last Paragraph: Wild Animals in a Menagerie (= Zoo) Organ Grinder’s Monkey Why These Animals?

42. OXYGEN Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47: OXYGEN Why Animals Referenced in Last Paragraph: – Wild Animals in a Menagerie (= Zoo) – Organ Grinder’s Monkey MAYBE: Valuable (but canary much less $$$) MAYBE: F should know there’s prior owner NOTE: Menagerie animals again inconsistent with simply relying on “tamed”

43. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47 & POSSIBLE POLICY RATIONALES Based in Labor/Investment The court stated that it would be unjust to allow the finder to keep a pet bird that escaped to the street. It compared the case to an escaped organ grinder’s monkey and to wild animals escaping from a menagerie. These analogies suggest that it might be trying to protect the original owner’s investment in training and purchasing the animal. This idea would support returning the canary to the plaintiff in this case.

44. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.47 & POSSIBLE POLICY RATIONALES Based in Notice to Finder The court stated that it would be unjust to allow the finder to keep a pet bird that escaped to the street. It compared the case to an escaped organ grinder’s monkey and to wild animals escaping from a menagerie. These analogies suggest that it might believe that the finders of all these animals ought to know that they have a prior owner, and so should return them. This idea would support returning the canary to the plaintiff in this case.

45. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : Plausible Factors Taming (or Other Investment in Animal) Marking (or F Likely Aware of OO) Emotional Bond Short Time/Distance from Escape

46. Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.48 ( Squirrel Hypothetical ) Monday ( URANIUM ) First: Apply Manning Factors to Squirrel Hypothetical Then: Look at Sample Holdings Articulated to Favor Each Party (E-Submissions Assigned on Next Slide)

47. URANIUM Mining Manning ‘ s Meaning : DQ 1.48 URANIUM E - Participation E - Mail Holding to Me by 3 pm Saturday For Amy: Cardenas Larey Osceola For Brandon: Ferrer O’Neil Pimentel

48. Albers v. E.A. Stephens & Co.: Important Case (Most of Next Week) Legal Analysis Most Complex We’ve Done – Lots of arguments addressed rapidly – Look at brief introduction in materials – Read carefully – Take time to carefully brief & answer DQs & do Self-Quiz – Compare to Kesler (similar facts but different reasoning)

49. Mullett v. Bradley DQ 1.49: Mullett Facts & Manning Factors ( Uranium ) We’ll Do It My Way !!

50. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Taming (or Other Investment in Animal) Marking (or F Likely Aware of OO) Emotional Bond Short Time/Distance from Escape

51. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Taming (or Other Investment in Animal) Evidence Here?

52. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Taming (or Other Investment in Animal) Evidence Here No Evidence of Taming/Training Probably Significant $$$ Investment (Cross- Country Travel) Factor Help OO Under Manning?

53. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Taming (or Other Investment in Animal) Evidence Here No Evidence of Taming/Training Probably Significant $$$ Investment Factor Help OO Under Manning? Not Tamed Unclear How Much $$$ Investment Helps (Maybe b/c of Menagerie Animals)

54. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Marking (or F Likely Aware of OO) Evidence Here?

55. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Marking (or F Likely Aware of OO) Evidence Here – “Blemishes” (Scarsides) – Maybe F Should Know b/c in Atlantic (Save for Discussion of Natural Liberty) Blemishes as Marks Help OO Under Manning? (Can compare to crest.) – To Identify Animal? – As Notice to Finder of Prior OO?

56. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Marking = “Blemishes” As I.D., Probably Better Than Crest More Permanent Others Unlikely to Have Same As Notice to Finder, Probably Weaker Could Occur Naturally in Wild Unless Scarring Pattern “Unnatural” (E.g., Imprint of Collar or Net)

57. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Emotional Bond: No Evidence at All “He stuck me on this stupid island and he doesn’t call, he doesn’t write ….”

58. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Related: Time of Ownership – Escape “a few days” after OO regained it Cf. Manning: Owned for 2 Years Not Helpful to OO of Sea Lion – Little Additional Investment – No Emotional Bonding

59. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Short Time/Distance from Escape Evidence Here: Captured by F ~2 Weeks After Escape Captured by F 70 Miles from “Home” OO discovers animal about 1 year later

60. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Short Time/Distance from Escape – Captured ~2 Weeks/70 Miles from “Home” Cf. Manning: 5 days/Nearby in Same Town Significance?

61. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Short Time/Distance from Escape – Captured ~2 Weeks/70 Miles from “Home” (v. 5 days/Nearby in Same Town) Longer Time & Distance Might Mean: – Less Training or Likelihood of Return – OO Less Likely to Recover – Animal More Likely to Have Returned to Wild BUT: 70 Miles for Sea Lion Probably Much Less Than for Canary (cf. Seattle  Ventura)

62. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Short Time/Distance from Escape Claimed by OO 1 Year After Found Cf. Manning: 1 Day After Found Significance?

63. URANIUM DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Short Time/Distance from Escape – Claimed by OO 1 Year After Found (v. 1 Day) Could Mean Insufficient Pursuit by OO Significant Investment by F

64. DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Factors Together: Taming: No Evidence (But Lot of $$$) Taming: No Evidence (But Lot of $$$) Marking: Good I.D.; Not Strong re Notice Marking: Good I.D.; Not Strong re Notice Emotional Bond: No Evidence of Emotional Bond: No Evidence of Short Time/Distance from Escape: Worse than Manning, Especially Year to Discover Short Time/Distance from Escape: Worse than Manning, Especially Year to Discover

65. DQ 1.49: Applying Manning ‘ s Factors to Facts of Mullett Factors Together Taming: No Evidence of (though $$$) Marking: Good I.D.; Not Strong re Notice Emotional Bond: No Evidence of Short Time/Distance: Worse than Manning, Esp. Year Pretty weak case for OO under Manning unless court considers $$$ investment very important.

66. Mullett v. Bradley DQ 1.50: KRYPTON Before Returning to Brief, We’ll Examine the Three Factors that the Court adopts from the English Common Law

67. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON 1.Abandonment: If Abandoned, to Finder 2.Intent to Return (Animus Revertendi/AR): If not abandoned & animal has AR, to OO 3.Return to Natural Liberty (NL): If no intent to return, and animal has returned to NL, to Finder

68. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON For Each Factor, We’ll: 1.Define & Discuss How to Prove 2.Discuss Why It Is Relevant to OO/F Disputes 3.Discuss Evidence & Outcome in Mullett 4.Later Discuss How It Would Apply to Facts of Manning and Albers

69. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON ABANDONMENT Define & Discuss How to Prove No Definition in Case; Usually Means Intentionally Giving Up Property Rights in Something. Look for act by OO indicating intent to relinquish ownership. Negligence in caring for the animal or in maintaining possession is insufficient (again, laptops in library).

70. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON ABANDONMENT Why Relevant to OO/F Disputes? Typically, we allow people to choose to give up property rights if they want to. Maybe unfair to return to OO, esp. if F aware of act of abandonment or has invested in animal.

71. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON ABANDONMENT Evidence & Outcome in Mullett Evidence of Abandonment Here?

72. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ABANDONMENT Evidence & Outcome in Mullett Evidence of Abandonment Here? – Investment, but low commercial value – Left unenclosed on island – No pursuit – BUT court says reasonable to think couldn’t find. Why Not? Should it Matter?

73. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ABANDONMENT Evidence & Outcome in Mullett Evidence of Abandonment Here? – Investment, but low commercial value – Left unenclosed on island – No pursuit – BUT court says reasonable to think couldn’t find. Outcome in Mullett?

74. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ABANDONMENT Outcome in Mullett? (see last para. p.44) [C]ounsel for the defendant [suggested] that the animal had been abandoned by the plaintiffs …. It is, however, unnecessary to pass upon this, in view of the conclusion to which we have come that the plaintiff had lost his right of property in the sea lion [because] it had regained its natural liberty without any intention of returning.

75. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ANIMUS REVERTENDI ( AR ) Define & Discuss How to Prove Animus Revertendi is “Intent to Return” in Latin. In this context, means animal (that is out of OO’s immediate control) intended to return home How do you prove what goes on in mind of animal?

76. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ANIMUS REVERTENDI ( AR ) Define & Discuss How to Prove Animus Revertendi is “Intent to Return” Blackstone: Can “only” show by “usual custom of returning.” Why Relevant to OO/F Disputes?

77. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ANIMUS REVERTENDI ( AR ) Why Relevant to OO/F Disputes? Shows labor/training by OO Shows connection betw OO and animal Reasonable for OO to let loose Evidence in Mullett?

78. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ANIMUS REVERTENDI ( AR ) Evidence & Outcome in Mullett Evidence – No prior returns – Leaves soon after placed on island – Travels 70 miles in 2 weeks with no return Outcome?

79. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : ANIMUS REVERTENDI ( AR ) Evidence & Outcome in Mullett Evidence – No prior returns – Leaves soon after placed on island – Travels 70 miles in 2 weeks with no return Outcome = No AR – Doesn’t appear to have been contested, so not a separate issue in case.

80. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) Court Defines NL: NL = “that which the animal formerly enjoyed, namely, to provide for itself, in the broadest sense which the phrase may be used.” Regained NL = “when, by its own volition, it has escaped from all artificial restraint and is free to follow the bent of its natural inclination.” How Would You Prove?

81. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) Proving NL: Look at Condition of Animal When Found – Is It Healthy? – Has It Survived for a While? Look at Biology of Animal – Where Does It Usually Live? (Climate/Habitat) – What Does It Eat?

82. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) Court Defines NL: NL = “that which the animal formerly enjoyed, namely, to provide for itself, in the broadest sense which the phrase may be used.” Regained NL = “when, by its own volition, it has escaped from all artificial restraint and is free to follow the bent of its natural inclination.” Why Relevant to OO/F Disputes?

83. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) Why Relevant to OO/F Disputes? Note that court doesn’t explain this. Labor/Control: OO should control (confine or pursue). If animal gets far enough away from control that it can take care of itself, OO loses. Notice/Certainty: If animal in place that ordinary finder wouldn’t know of prior owner, OO loses

84. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) What exactly is at issue in Mullett?

85. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) What exactly is at issue in Mullett? Can animal be in natural liberty even if not natural habitat? Court says yes. Mullett provides definition and result w/o explanation. (Insufficient for you!)

86. KRYPTON DQ 1.50: Mullett Factors : KRYPTON : Return to NATURAL LIBERTY ( NL ) Court says can be NL even if not natural habitat. Fit w purposes of Rule that, if NL  F? Labor/Control: OO should control (confine or pursue). If animal gets far enough away from control that it can take care of itself, OO loses. Notice/Certainty: If animal in place that ordinary finder wouldn’t know of prior owner, OO loses