3 ms·

There are multiple property right violations here and the body of law is not all that clear. 4-H violated the parent’s property rights to the goat by proceeding

by TimPC 4y ago

There are multiple property right violations here and the body of law is not all that clear. 4-H violated the parent’s property rights to the goat by proceeding with the auction against their will. At this point it becomes unclear who the legitimate owner of the property is, it may still be the parents as auctions of stolen property don’t make ownership legitimate. I think making the buyer of the goat financially whole is a reasonable outcome here and police operating out of county and seizing property without due process is clearly not. 4-H doesn’t get to use its principles to force an auction upon unwilling sellers. If they had partial or full ownership of the goat this might be different but as long as the parents and child have bought the goat as part of raising it they can’t proceed with the auction against the wishes of that parent and child.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> 4-H violated the parent’s property rights to the goat by proceeding with the auction against their will 4-H programs typically loan a goat to a family to raise for the intention of teaching livestock husbandry. The goat is never legally the family’s property. (Not sure about this case.) EDIT: It appears this program involves purchasing the goat. Suing the police is still stupid. They were enforcing a purchase and sale under warrant [1]. There may be a case against the Fair, depending on when the auction contract bound the parents to the sale. (The parents attempted to terminate the auction on the show date. Had they done so literally the day before, this would have been, based on the case, open and shut.) [1] https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf page 9
- Hizonner 4y ago
  Wrong. 4-H (or somebody) sold her the goat, and in fact their rules required her to maintain legal ownership of the goat. You are making statments of "fact" without checking them. Complaint: https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

by TimPC 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> 4-H violated the parent’s property rights to the goat by proceeding with the auction against their will 4-H programs typically loan a goat to a family to raise for the intention of teaching livestock husbandry. The goat is never legally the family’s property. (Not sure about this case.) EDIT: It appears this program involves purchasing the goat. Suing the police is still stupid. They were enforcing a purchase and sale under warrant [1]. There may be a case against the Fair, depending on when the auction contract bound the parents to the sale. (The parents attempted to terminate the auction on the show date. Had they done so literally the day before, this would have been, based on the case, open and shut.) [1] https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf page 9

Hizonner 4y ago
Wrong. 4-H (or somebody) sold her the goat, and in fact their rules required her to maintain legal ownership of the goat. You are making statments of "fact" without checking them. Complaint: https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/2022-08-31-Complaint.pdf
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]