Georgia O’Keefe v. Barry Snyder case brief

Georgia O’Keefe v. Barry Snyder, Sup. Ct. of NJ, 1980

FACTS

1. P alleges owner of paintings that were stolen and D asserts he adverse possessed it and P action for replevin was barred by expiration of statute of limitations
2. Uniform Commercial Code permits person with voidable title to transfer good title to a bona fide purchaser

-Voidable title is not good against the owner as long as the item is not in the hands of a BFP

Thieves has no title and can’t transfer a good title to purchaser who bought it from a theft

-Discovery Rule – Tolling provisions that says statute of limitation does not begin to run when the action occurs, begins to run at the time when you discovered or should have discovered the basis for a claim

-Court applies to stolen art work and said the discovery of the identity of the person in possession of the stole property

-Person who wants to invoke the discovery rule has to show they used due diligence to discover who has it and if failed to use due diligence that can not use the discovery rule

-Burden is on owner as one seeking the benefit of the rule to establish facts that would justified deferring the beginning of the period of limitations
-Statute of Limitations – purpose is to stimulate activity and punish negligence and bars a cause of action after the statutory period

-Problem with A.P. in chattel is it hard to show open and notorious. NJ no longer applies a.p. to chattel, applies discovery rule.

-Dissent – Limitation was tolled and P is rightful owner