Comments on: Court Rules 1933 $20 Double Eagles Property of Family

By: Whistler

Whistler — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 21:05:50 +0000

Now I can let the mint check the 10 ’33’s I got!

By: Boz

Boz — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 15:53:17 +0000

It is often said that possession is 9/10 of the law, although some poor guy recently had his vintage car taken away when it was found to have been stolen multiple-owners before him. He did not even get compensated for having fixed it up on his dime.

The coin case also does square with the finders keepers situation in California recently, where gold coins found buried in coffee cans were not taken back by the government, even though they had clearly been stolen by a long-deceased former San Francisco mint employee.

I guess the difference is that vehicles have serial numbers while coins do not.

By: Senior

Senior — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 14:52:41 +0000

After all the legal maneuvering I applaud the Langford family.

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 18:33:35 +0000

This is interesting because it may violate the agreement reached with Fenton that monetized the 1933 double eagle as the sole “legal” issue released for that date. I’m not an attorney but wonder if it could also legalize possession of patterns never released by the mint (I believe that coves the post-1883 issues). Even more open to discussion is whether this sets a precedent should someone come forth with a 1964-D peace dollar.

By: jim

jim — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 18:08:42 +0000

Betcha they don’t do it and the govt finds an excuse to shoot their dog.