The city of Everett brought an action against the Sumstad estate and the Mitchells to determine the owner of the money. Who should receive the money? Why?
On August 12, Mr. and Mrs. Mitchell, the owners of a small secondhand store, attended Alexander’s Auction, where they bought a used safe for $50. The safe, part of the Sumstad estate, contained a locked inside compartment. Both the auctioneer and the Mitchells knew this fact. Soon after the auction, the Mitchells had the compartment opened by a locksmith, who discovered $32,207 inside. The Everett Police Department impounded the money. The city of Everett brought an action against the Sumstad estate and the Mitchells to determine the owner of the money. Who should receive the money? Why?
This case comes under auction sale since the auctioneer has intention the to give the safe, the involved parties also mutually approve to such a sale. The words and acts depict the intentions of the parties. In this case, Individual M thought that all sales of the auction were final and no statement reserving rights to any content of the safe is made by the dealer. So, the money must be received by Individual M.
Individual M is going to authorize the funds and the discernment goes in favor of Individual M. The intentions of the parties are disclosed by the agreement wherein situations related to sales are highlighted. An implicit intention is immaterial.