DOCSLIB.ORG

Bailment Or Consignment: It Makes a Difference!

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bailment Or Consignment: It Makes a Difference! COMING IN JANUARY: RAISING THE BAR NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CREDIT MANAGEMENT ® BUSINESSCredit NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2006 • $7.00 THE PUBLICATION FOR CREDIT & FINANCE PROFESSIONALS CREDITCOLUMN Bruce S. Nathan, Esq. BAILMENT OR CONSIGNMENT: IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE! n a tolling arrangement, a vendor legal requirements for obtaining a purchase The consignment terms are frequently usually supplies raw materials to a money type priority interest in the goods. governed by a written agreement commodity processor for conver- This issue recently arose in In re between the consignor and consignee. sioIn into finished product. The processor Citation Corporation, a Chapter 11 case The agreement should contain all of the then delivers the finished or partially fin- pending in the United States Bankruptcy necessary terms and conditions to pro- ished product to the supplier, or the sup- Court for the Northern District of tect a consigner’s interest in the con- plier’s designee, and charges the supplier a Alabama. The debtor/processor and a steel signed goods. Consignments are also fee for the processor’s services. supplier had entered into a “Consignment governed by each state’s Uniform In many tolling arrangements, both the Agreement” for the processor’s forging of Commercial Code (“UCC”). material supplier and the processor the supplier’s steel into airplane crank- UCC Article 9 governs most consign- assume—and their contracts frequently shafts. The processor’s blanket inventory ment transactions. UCC Section 9- provide—that the supplier retains owner- secured lender claimed a prior right to the 102(a)(20) defines a consignment as a ship of the raw materials delivered to the supplier’s steel located at the processor’s transaction in which a person delivers processor, and the finished or semi-fin- forging facility when the processor had goods to a merchant for purposes of sale, ished product of such new materials, in the filed Chapter 11. and (a) the merchant deals in goods of that processor’s possession. However, these The Bankruptcy Court held that the kind under a name other than the name of expectations might be shattered where the transaction was a bailment, rather than a the person making delivery, is not an auc- processor has financial problems and ends consignment. As such, the supplier was tioneer and is not generally known by its up filing for bankruptcy. the owner of the steel and prevailed over creditors to be substantially engaged in Now, might the poor supplier find itself the lender. selling the goods of others; (b) the goods competing with the insolvent processor’s must have a value of at least $1,000 at the bankruptcy estate and blanket secured CONSIGNMENT VS. BAILMENT time of delivery; (c) the goods are not con- inventory lender over who has a prior right sumer goods immediately before delivery; to the supplier’s raw material and finished Consignment and (d) the transaction does not create a goods in the processor’s possession? The In a consignment, the consignor security interest. answer to this question depends on retains title to the goods that were deliv- The consignor should file a UCC whether the tolling arrangement is a con- ered to the consignee. Title passes to the financing statement describing the goods signment or bailment. The supplier would consignee upon the consignee’s use or in the correct jurisdiction in order to lose if the transaction is characterized as a sale of the goods. The consignor usually maintain a protected interest in the goods. consignment unless the supplier had filed a issues an invoice after the consignee’s Otherwise, the consignee’s creditors can UCC-1 financing statement describing the reported sale or use of the goods, and the obtain judicial liens and security interests goods and otherwise complied with the consignee can return used or unused in the goods, and according to UCC goods to the consignor. Section 9-317(a), a judicial lien creditor (including a bankruptcy trustee or debtor- tus. Courts have found a transaction to be risk of loss once Citation was in possession in-possession) has priority over an unper- a bailment based on the existence of the of the Avco Steel. Citation never used the fected consignor. And under Article 9, the following factors: Avco Steel for any other purpose other than consignor could file a UCC on its own, 1. The bailor supplying the goods producing crankshaft forgings for Avco, without the consignee’s signature, as long retained the option to seek their return based upon a production schedule deter- as there is a consignment agreement exe- prior to processing and to the return or dis- mined by Avco, all in accordance with the cuted or otherwise authenticated by the position of the finished product according Consignment Agreement. The consignee that describes the consigned to the bailor’s instructions; Consignment Agreement also did not pro- goods. The consignor uses the same UCC 2. The bailor retained title to the raw vide for Citation’s purchase of Avco Steel or form that a secured creditor uses in per- materials it had supplied and finished for Citation’s sale of the Avco Steel to a fecting a security interest in personal prop- product produced from it and the bailee third party. erty collateral. The UCC form also allows held the goods for the bailor’s benefit; After forging the Avco Steel, Citation the consignor to confirm the existence of a 3. The processor/bailee retained the risk returned the forgings to either Avco or consignment transaction. of loss for the raw materials and finished Avco’s designee for further work. The The consignee must do more to obtain product in its possession; Consignment Agreement further directed priority over the rights of the consignee’s 4. The supplier’s raw materials were seg- both Citation and Avco to monitor their secured lender, or other creditor, with a regated from the processor’s other property; transactions to ensure that all the Avco Steel prior blanket security interest in the con- 5. The processor did not include the that Avco had delivered to Citation was signee’s inventory. According to UCC supplier’s raw materials as part of the manufactured into crankshaft forgings and Section 9-103(d) a consignor has a pur- processor’s inventory; and then redelivered to Avco or Avco’s designee. chase money security interest in its con- 6. The supplier did not show an account signed goods. As such, the consignor would receivable owing by the processor. Citation’s Loan Agreements with Its have priority over creditors holding prior The bailor/supplier’s failure to satisfy Secured Lender inventory security interests in the goods if any of these requirements could result in Prior to Citation’s and Avco’s entry into the consignor satisfies all of the require- the loss of bailment status and characteri- the Consignment Agreement, Citation and ments contained in UCC Section 9-324 for zation of the transaction as a consignment. its secured lender, J.P. Morgan, had entered a purchase money security interest. These To further confuse matters, consignments into a lending arrangement. Citation had requirements include (a) filing a UCC-1 share a number of these criteria. This has granted J.P. Morgan a security interest in financing statement describing the goods resulted in the courts struggling to distin- Citation’s accounts and inventory to secure prior to the consignee’s receipt of the guish between a bailment and consignment payment of the loans pursuant to various goods; (b) sending an authenticated notifi- and reaching inconsistent decisions. As a agreements entered into between them. J.P. cation to the holders of conflicting security result, transactions that suppliers had Morgan also filed a UCC financing state- interests in the consignee’s inventory that assumed to be bailments ended up being ment describing its collateral, thereby per- states that the consignor has, or expects to treated as sales or consignments. In these fecting its security interest. acquire, a consignment interest in the circumstances, the bailor/supplier had to goods and describes the goods; and (c) satisfy all of the UCC Article 9 require- Citation’s Chapter 11 Filing receipt of such notice by the holders of ments for obtaining a perfected security or Citation operated under the conflicting inventory security interests consignment interest in the goods and pri- Consignment Agreement until September within five years before the consignee’s ority over the bailee/processor’s blanket 18, 2004 when Citation filed Chapter 11. At receipt of the goods. inventory secured lender. Any bailor/sup- that time, Citation had 306,000 pounds of plier that had failed to satisfy these require- Avco Steel at Citation’s Navasota, Texas Bailment ments was relegated to the status of a low forging facility. A bailment is a delivery of goods by the priority general unsecured creditor. On November 18, 2004, Avco filed a owner, the bailor, to another party, the motion for relief from the automatic stay bailee, for some express purpose. After ful- THE FACTS OF THE CITATION CASE to obtain possession of the Avco Steel at filling this purpose, the bailee is obligated Citation’s facility. Avco, J.P. Morgan, to return the goods to the bailor or dispose The Parties’ Arrangement Citation and its unsecured creditors’ com- of the goods according to the bailor’s On December 11, 2002, Citation entered mittee agreed to (1) Avco’s taking posses- instructions. As such, a bailment is an into a Consignment Agreement with sion of the Avco Steel; (2) valuing the Avco entrustment under UCC Article 2-403(3). Lycoming Engines, a division of Avco Steel at $306,000; and (3) reserving the The bailor has a right to the goods with Corporation (“Avco”).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Protecting Consignors' Interests and Rights to Recover Property
    A NEW YORK LAW JOURNAL SPECIAL SECTION Corporate Restructuring & Bankruptcy WWW. NYLJ.COM MONDAY, JUNE 22, 2015 Protecting Consignors’ Interests And Rights to Recover Property BY CARREN B. SHULMAN onsignment is an arrangement between two parties for one to sell the goods C of another. If the goods are sold, a dis- counted sales price is paid to the original seller with the balance to the buyer/con- signee. Many retail industries have used consignment for years, but many are mov- ing towards consignment. Other industries have used consignment and consignment-like relationships, such as “conditional sales.”1 In this uncertain economy, consignment is realizing a resurgence and may be an effec- tive cost saving measure for vendors/con- signees. This article addresses the law on consignment and how consignors protect themselves. Consignment is governed by Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). §9-109(a)(4). Consignment is defined in UCC §9-102 as: a transaction, regardless of its form, in which a person delivers goods to a mer- chant for the purpose of sale and: (A) the merchant (i) deals in goods of that kind under a name other than the name of the person making delivery; aggregate value of the goods is $1,000 ship rights. To the extent the consignment (ii) is not an auctioneer; and or more at the time of delivery; relationship fails sections (B) or (C) above, there may be a consignment relationship, (iii) is not generally known by its credi- (C) the goods are not consumer goods but it may not be governed by Article 9.
    [Show full text]
  • July 2007 Real Property Question 6
    July 2007 Real Property Question 6 MEE Question 6 Owen owned vacant land (Whiteacre) in State B located 500 yards from a lake and bordered by vacant land owned by others. Owen, who lived 50 miles from Whiteacre, used Whiteacre for cutting firewood and for parking his car when he used the lake. Twenty years ago, Owen delivered to Abe a deed that read in its entirety: Owen hereby conveys to the grantee by a general warranty deed that parcel of vacant land in State B known as Whiteacre. Owen signed the deed immediately below the quoted language and his signature was notarized. The deed was never recorded. For the next eleven years, Abe seasonally planted vegetables on Whiteacre, cut timber on it, parked vehicles there when he and his family used the nearby lake for recreation, and gave permission to friends to park their cars and recreational vehicles there. He also paid the real property taxes due on the land, although the tax bills were actually sent to Owen because title had not been registered in Abe’s name on the assessor’s books. Abe did not build any structure on Whiteacre, fence it, or post no-trespassing signs. Nine years ago, Abe moved to State C. Since that time, he has neither used Whiteacre nor given others permission to use Whiteacre, and to all outward appearances the land has appeared unoccupied. Last year, Owen died intestate leaving his daughter, Doris, as his sole heir. After Owen’s death, Doris conveyed Whiteacre by a valid deed to Buyer, who paid fair market value for Whiteacre.
    [Show full text]
  • Instructions for Completing Form BIS-711, Statement of Ultimate Consignee and Purchaser
    Instructions for completing Form BIS-711, Statement of Ultimate Consignee and Purchaser All information must be typed or legibly printed in each appropriate Block or Box. Block 1: Ultimate Consignee. The Ultimate Consignee must be the person abroad who is actually to receive the material for the disposition stated in Block 2. Therefore, a bank, freight forwarder, forwarding agent, or other intermediary is not acceptable as the Ultimate Consignee (For a definition of intermediate consignee, please see page 2 of this document.) If the ultimate consignee is an individual, please state the name as listed on a government-issued ID. If the ultimate consignee is a company, please state the company name and address as listed on the business license/business certificate. * Please note: The information given in Block 1 must match the name and address listed on your Bill of Lading/Air Waybill issued by a freight forwarder. Block 2: Disposition or Use of Items by Ultimate Consignee named in Block 1. Place an (X) in “A.,” “B.,” “C.,” “D.,” and “E.,” as appropriate, and fill in the required information. * Please note: Certain armored vehicles are considered a controlled item under Department of Commerce export regulations (ECCN 0A606), and cannot be resold, transferred or re-exported without prior authorization from the US Department of Commerce. Block 3: Nature of Business of Ultimate Consignee named in Block 1. Complete both “A” and “B”. Possible choices for “A” include: broker, distributor, fabricator, manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, value added reseller, original equipment manufacturer, etc. Possible choices for “B” include: contractual, franchise, distributor, wholesaler, continuing and regular individual business, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • DCCA Opinion No. 01-CV-1437: Sylvia Maalouf V. Imran Butt, Et
    Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 01-CV-1437 SYLVIA MAALOUF, APPELLANT, V. IMRAN BUTT, et al., APPELLEES. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (SC-20704-00) (Hon. Milton C. Lee, Hearing Commissioner) (Hon. Steffen W. Graae, Trial Judge) (Submitted November 19, 2002 Decided February 20, 2003) Sylvia Maalouf, pro se. Sean D. Hummel was on the brief, for appellees. Before TERRY and STEADMAN, Associate Judges, and FERREN, Senior Judge. FERREN, Senior Judge: In this small claims case, appellant Maalouf, proceeding pro se, sought damages from appellee Butt for the loss of her car at Butt’s repair shop. The hearing commissioner, sustained by a trial judge, found for Maalouf but awarded her only $150 for the loss of the car radio. Maalouf contends on appeal that the commissioner erred in denying full damages for loss of the car on the ground that Maalouf had failed to present sufficient evidence of the car’s value (in addition to the value of the radio) as of the time she brought the vehicle to Butt’s shop for repair. We reverse and remand for further 2 proceedings. Maalouf testified that her car, while under Butt’s control, had been vandalized twice and eventually stolen. The hearing commissioner accepted her testimony as true for purposes of decision, and the issue thus became the amount of recovery.1 “The traditional standard for calculating damages for conversion is the fair market value of the property at the time of the conversion”– here, as of the time Maalouf brought the car to Butt’s shop for repair.
    [Show full text]
  • Consignment Accounting Journal Entries
    Definition and Explanation of Consignment: Learning Objectives: 1. Define and explain the terms consignment, consignor and consignee. The word consignment can be generally defined as the act of sending a quantity of goods by the manufacturers and producers of one country or place to their agents in another at the risk of the principals for the purpose of sale. Goods so sent are known as "consignment". The sender of the goods is called the consignor. Generally the manufacturers or producers are consignors. The person to whom goods are forwarded for the purpose of sale is known as the consignee. The consignment can beclassified as: 1. Outward consignment. 2. Inward consignment. It is called "outward" when the dispatch of a quantity of goods from one country to another is made for the purpose of sale and is called "inward" when the receipt of the quantity of goods is made for the purpose of sale. Goods sent on consignment do not become the property of the consignee. He has not bought them. The ownership remains with the sender or the consigner. If the goods are destroyed, the receiver (consignee) is not responsible. The loss will fall on the consignor. The consignee tries to sell the goods according to the instructions of the consignor. When the goods have been sold, he will deduct his expenses, commission, etc., from the sale proceeds and the balance is remitted to the consignor. The relationship between the consignor and the consignee is that of principle and agent. The consignee is the agent. The consignee acts entirely on behalf of the consignor.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSIGNMENT & JOINT VENTURE Meaning and Features Of
    CONSIGNMENT & JOINT VENTURE Meaning and Features of Consignment Consignment is a process under which the owner consigns/handovers his materials to his agent/salesman for the purpose of shipping, transfer, sale etc. Following are the points that throw more light on the nature and scope of a consignment − Here, ultimate ownership of the goods remains with the manufacturer or whole seller who handovers goods to his agent for sale on commission basis. Consignment is merely a transfer of possession of goods not an ownership. Since ownership of goods remain with the manufacturer (consignor), consignee (agent) is not responsible for any loss or destruction of goods. The goods are sold on owner’s risk and hence, profit/loss goes to owner. Consignee only gets re-imbursement of expenses incurred by him and commission on sale made by him, because sale that proceeds, belongs to owner (consignor). Why is Consignment not a Sale? Following are the reasons that explain why consignment is not a sale − Ownership − Ownership of goods need to be transferred from seller to buyer in case of sale, but ownership of goods remains with the consignor, till the goods are sold by the consignee. Risk − In case of a consignment, normally, risk remains with the consignor in the event of goods being lost or destroyed. Relationship − The relation between a seller and a buyer will be of debtor and creditor in case where goods are sold on credit basis. On the other hand, the relationship between a consignor and a consignee is that of principal and agent. Goods Return − Usually, the sold goods cannot be returned back; however, if there is any manufacturing defect or any other technical fault, seller is obliged to take them back.
    [Show full text]
  • 1Judge John Holland and the Vice- Admiralty Court of the Cape of Good Hope, 1797-1803: Some Introductory and Biographical Notes (Part 1)
    1JUDGE JOHN HOLLAND AND THE VICE- ADMIRALTY COURT OF THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, 1797-1803: SOME INTRODUCTORY AND BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES (PART 1) JP van Niekerk* ABSTRACT A British Vice-Admiralty Court operated at the Cape of Good Hope from 1797 until 1803. It determined both Prize causes and (a few) Instance causes. This Court, headed by a single judge, should be distinguished from the ad hoc Piracy Court, comprised of seven members of which the Admiralty judge was one, which sat twice during this period, and also from the occasional naval courts martial which were called at the Cape. The Vice-Admiralty Court’s judge, John Holland, and its main officials and practitioners were sent out from Britain. Key words: Vice-Admiralty Court; Cape of Good Hope; First British Occupation of the Cape; jurisdiction; Piracy Court; naval courts martial; Judge John Holland; other officials, practitioners and support staff of the Vice-Admiralty Court * Professor, Department of Mercantile Law, School of Law, University of South Africa. Fundamina DOI: 10.17159/2411-7870/2017/v23n2a8 Volume 23 | Number 2 | 2017 Print ISSN 1021-545X/ Online ISSN 2411-7870 pp 176-210 176 JUDGE JOHN HOLLAND AND THE VICE-ADMIRALTY COURT OF THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE 1 Introduction When the 988 ton, triple-decker HCS Belvedere, under the command of Captain Charles Christie,1 arrived at the Cape on Saturday 3 February 1798 on her fifth voyage to the East, she had on board a man whose arrival was eagerly anticipated locally in both naval and legal circles. He was the first British judicial appointment to the recently acquired settlement and was to serve as judge of the newly created Vice-Admiralty Court of the Cape of Good Hope.
    [Show full text]
  • Aaa800ews0p1260outi0june0
    Report No. AAA80 - DJ Republic of Djibouti Public Disclosure Authorized Study on regulation of private operators in the port of Djibouti Technical Assistance Final report June 2012 Middle East and North Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized Transport Group World Bank document Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Study on regulation of private operators in the port of Djibouti Contents CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 9 REGULATION ACTION PLAN FOR PORT ACTIVITES IN DJIBOUTI ........................................ 13 REPORT 1 - DIAGNOSIS ................................................................................................................. 16 1. PORT FACILITIES AND OPERATORS ................................................................................. 17 1.1. An outstanding port and logistics hub .......................................................... 17 1.2. Doraleh oil terminal ...................................................................................... 18 1.3. Doraleh container terminal ........................................................................... 18 1.4. Djibouti container terminal ........................................................................... 19 1.5. Djibouti bulk terminal ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Four Property Wrongs of Self Storage
    FOUR PROPERTY WRONGS OF SELF-STORAGE LAW Jeffrey Douglas Jones Table of Contents Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question I. The Wild, Wild Lease: Self-Storage Agreements and Default Practices A. Owner’s Liens B. Lien Attachment and Risk of Loss C. From Default to Lien Enforcement D. Lien Enforcement Transferring Title to Landlord E. Lien Enforcement by Public Auction II. The Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law A. The “Crap” Rule B. Tort Law Misfires and the Elimination of Bailments C. Ignored Parallels to Residential Landlord-Tenant Reform D. Treasure Trove and Self-Storage Treasure Hunters III. Conclusion: Legal Reform, Voluntariness, and the Property Ethic “Own Less” Jeffrey Douglas Jones, Associate Professor of Law, Lewis & Clark Law School; J.D., The University of Michigan Law School-Ann Arbor; Ph.D. Philosophy, The University of Wisconsin-Madison. [Thanks] 1 Jones / Four Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question Self-storage leases are troubling. Under such leases, self-storage facility owners may freely dispose of defaulting tenants’ medical and tax records, family ashes, heirlooms, etc. in the same manner as they would treat fungible items such as chairs or a bookshelf. Facility owners are legally entitled to do so through facility-sponsored auctions, most of which are unrestricted by any duty to conduct commercially reasonable sales. Still worse, these legal self- storage practices have generated a clandestine culture of treasure-hunting that often leaves tenants—some of whom default due to medical emergencies, bankruptcy or who are homeless working poor—with little opportunity either to regain good standing or obtain fair market value for their belongings.
    [Show full text]
  • Shipping and Incoterms
    Shipping and Incoterms Practice Guide UNDP PRACTICE SERIES Shipping and Incoterms Practice Guide Graphic Design, Layout and Print Production: Phoenix Design Aid A/S, Denmark. ISO 9001/ISO 14001/OHSAS 18001 certified. Printed on: This publication is printed on certified environmentally approved paper with vegetable-based inks. The printed matter is recyclable. Contents Introduction 1 1 Shipping 2 Section 1 of these guidelines is intended for persons dealing with purchasing and shipping, but it is recommended that persons at the receiving end also read it to be more familiar with how shipping operates, its terminology and documentation. Chapter 1: Importance of Transportation and Summary 2 Chapter 2: Methods of Dispatch 2 Chapter 3: Selection of Method of Dispatch 7 Chapter 4: Packing – Markings – Addresses 8 Chapter 5: Parties Involved in the Chain of Transport Events 10 Chapter 6: Shipping Documents 11 Chapter 7: Forwarding Arrangements 14 Chapter 8: Shipping Instructions 15 Chapter 9: Distribution of Shipping Documentation 16 Chapter 10: Insurance Coverage 18 Chapter 11: Insurance Claim 21 2 Receiving 24 Section 2 will explain the steps to be taken for the withdrawal of supplies upon their arrival, and especially what to do when the consignment is not in good order. Chapter 1: Retrieval 24 Chapter 2: Receipt and Inspection 25 Chapter 3: Reporting and Claims 26 Chapter 4: Feedback and Cooperation 28 Chapter 5 Examples of Claim Letters 29 3 Terms and Glossary 34 Section 3 introduces Incoterms, UNCITRAL and contains a glossary of the most common terms used in the shipping world. Chapter 1: Incoterms 34 Chapter 2: Uncitral 44 Chapter 3: Glossary 46 UNDP Practice Series, Shipping and Incoterms, November 2008 This Practice Guide is protected by international copyright laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Shipping Network June 2014
    Legal Eagles Do you have a burning legal question for the HFW Shipping Legal Network team? Email [email protected] for them to answer your question in the next issue of the Shipping Network . Questions should be of a general nature and not specific to a Eagles... particular live issue. Holman Fenwick Willan’s crack team of specialist shipping lawyers answer your legal questions Under a combined transport bill of lading, “Freight: shall be the freight and all charges, costs, duties where the shipping line is responsible for and expenses whatsoever, payable to the carrier, or incurred by Q delivery to the named destination, should the carrier in carriage of the goods in accordance with the the shipper or any party named as consignee applicable tariff and this bill of lading, including storage, per diem or notify party be responsible for any charges and demurrage.” Guy Main if the container is delivered within the A freight definition of this type arguably includes any charges demurrage-free period shown in the bill of incurred by the carrier as a result of the contract of carriage. There lading, but where the UK port of discharge only allows the may be an argument that ‘expected’ charges are not included shipping line a shorter period free for quay rent? as they should have been provided for in the original quotation, but charges that arise out of a delay to the carriage or otherwise Ascertaining the rights of various parties arise from an event outside of the normal carriage of goods will under a bill of lading is a question of almost certainly be included.
    [Show full text]
  • Inadequate Protection of Tenants' Property During Eviction and the Need for Reform Larry Weiser Prof
    Loyola Consumer Law Review Volume 20 | Issue 3 Article 2 2008 Adding Injury to Injury: Inadequate Protection of Tenants' Property During Eviction and the Need for Reform Larry Weiser Prof. & Dir. Of Clinical Law Programs, Gonzaga University, School of Law Matthew .T Treu Assoc., Alverson, Taylor, Mortensen & Sanders, Law Vegas Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lclr Part of the Consumer Protection Law Commons Recommended Citation Larry Weiser & Matthew T. Treu Adding Injury to Injury: Inadequate Protection of Tenants' Property During Eviction and the Need for Reform, 20 Loy. Consumer L. Rev. 247 (2008). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lclr/vol20/iss3/2 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola Consumer Law Review by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FEA TURE AR TICLES Adding Injury to Injury: Inadequate Protection of Tenants' Property During Eviction and the Need for Reform By Larry Weiser* & Matthew W. Treu** I. Introduction Irene Parker, an 82 year-old single woman with health problems, was evicted at Christmas-time due to repair and rental disputes with her landlords. The amount in dispute was $1,200, far less than the monetary value of Ms. Parker's life possessions, which was $15,000. Upon being evicted and having everything she owned put on a public curb, Ms. Parker was forced to pay for a cab so that she could stay at a friend's home until she could find a new place to live.
    [Show full text]