Campins v. Capels

461 N.E.2d 712 (1984)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Between January 11 and January 13, 1981, Earl Hall, eighteen years old, stole various items of jewelry from the P's home (for which he was later convicted). Ps issued flyers, describing the missing jewelry and offering a reward for its return, and contacted various gold and silver dealers where the items might have been sold by Hall. P spoke with D, sole proprietor of two such dealerships. She claims he admitted purchasing some of the Capelses' jewelry but told her he had already melted it down with the exception of a sterling silver ring which he returned to her. P sued D under IND. CODE 34-4-30-1, which authorized them to sue for treble damages because they were victims of a criminal offense against property. Involved in the meltdown were three national racing championship rings awarded by United States Auto Club (USAC) and a free-form wedding band with twelve diamonds. D as much as admitted having bought the jewelry. Testimony was also presented to substantiate the claim that D knew or should have known that the rings he destroyed were stolen. D failed to abide by municipal ordinances regulating certain practices of such second-hand licensed dealers. In particular, one ordinance requires dealers to hold intact each purchased item for at least ten days after the date of purchase. Here, D kept the rings for, at most, five days. Dealers are also required to keep a record book, chronicling each purchase, and separate cards for each item said cards to be turned into the police every Friday. The cards were also to display the right thumbprint of the seller. P testified his three USAC rings very clearly exhibited the name of the recipient on their faces: 'P. Jones' (Parnelli Jones) on one and 'J. Capels' on the other two. Neither name matched that of the eighteen-year-old seller, Earl Hall, who was not even old enough to hold a driver's license when any of the rings were awarded. P testified to the strong sentimental value of the USAC rings. The court held that the USAC rings were worth $1,000 each and then awarded P treble damages of $11,100. The trial court ruled D liable for the value of some of their jewelry because he had purchased and had then destroyed some pieces when he knew or should have known they were stolen. This being the offense of criminal mischief, the trial court awarded P treble damages of $11,000. D appealed.