The Right to Abandon

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences
L. Strahilevitz
{"title":"The Right to Abandon","authors":"L. Strahilevitz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1348211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The common law prohibits the abandonment of real property. Perhaps it is surprising, therefore, that the following are true: (1) The common law generally permits the abandonment of chattel property; (2) The common law promotes the transfer of real property via adverse possession; and (3) the civil law permits the abandonment of real property. Because the literature on abandonment is disappointingly sparse, these three contrasts have escaped sustained scholarly analysis and criticism. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the law of abandonment. After engaging in such an analysis, the paper finds that the common law's flat prohibition on the abandonment of corporeal interests in real property is misguided. Legal rules prohibiting abandonment ought to be replaced with more a more permissive regime where what matters is the value of the underlying resource and the steps that the abandoning owner takes to ensure that would-be claimants are alerted to the resource's availability. Furthermore, the law of abandonment ought to be harmonized for real property and chattels. Finally, the paper criticizes the law's preference for adverse possession over abandonment as a means of transferring title in cases where the mechanisms might function as substitutes.In the course of analyzing the law of abandonment and offering a qualified defense of the practice, the paper provides the first workable definition of resource abandonment, develops a taxonomy of existing regimes, suggests that the abandonment of positive-value real and intellectual property is surprisingly widespread, and analyzes the costs and benefits associated with abandonment. The paper explores at some length the factors that will determine whether an owner opts for abandonment or other means for extinguishing his rights to a resource, as well as the considerations that should drive the law's receptivity to these efforts. The latter include the decision costs, transaction costs, decay costs, confusion costs, lawless race costs, and sustainability issues associated with abandonment. In addition, readers who make it through the paper will be exposed to pertinent tidbits concerning the social norms of geocaching, the anthropology of \"making it rain,\" the unfortunate decline of municipal bulky trash pickup, Mississippi's misguided livestock laws, and the dubious parenting choices of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.","PeriodicalId":48012,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","volume":"158 1","pages":"355"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2009-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"82","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1348211","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 82

Abstract

The common law prohibits the abandonment of real property. Perhaps it is surprising, therefore, that the following are true: (1) The common law generally permits the abandonment of chattel property; (2) The common law promotes the transfer of real property via adverse possession; and (3) the civil law permits the abandonment of real property. Because the literature on abandonment is disappointingly sparse, these three contrasts have escaped sustained scholarly analysis and criticism. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the law of abandonment. After engaging in such an analysis, the paper finds that the common law's flat prohibition on the abandonment of corporeal interests in real property is misguided. Legal rules prohibiting abandonment ought to be replaced with more a more permissive regime where what matters is the value of the underlying resource and the steps that the abandoning owner takes to ensure that would-be claimants are alerted to the resource's availability. Furthermore, the law of abandonment ought to be harmonized for real property and chattels. Finally, the paper criticizes the law's preference for adverse possession over abandonment as a means of transferring title in cases where the mechanisms might function as substitutes.In the course of analyzing the law of abandonment and offering a qualified defense of the practice, the paper provides the first workable definition of resource abandonment, develops a taxonomy of existing regimes, suggests that the abandonment of positive-value real and intellectual property is surprisingly widespread, and analyzes the costs and benefits associated with abandonment. The paper explores at some length the factors that will determine whether an owner opts for abandonment or other means for extinguishing his rights to a resource, as well as the considerations that should drive the law's receptivity to these efforts. The latter include the decision costs, transaction costs, decay costs, confusion costs, lawless race costs, and sustainability issues associated with abandonment. In addition, readers who make it through the paper will be exposed to pertinent tidbits concerning the social norms of geocaching, the anthropology of "making it rain," the unfortunate decline of municipal bulky trash pickup, Mississippi's misguided livestock laws, and the dubious parenting choices of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
放弃权
普通法禁止放弃不动产。因此,以下情况可能令人惊讶:(1)普通法一般允许放弃动产;(2)普通法提倡逆权占有的不动产转让;(3)民法允许放弃不动产。因为关于遗弃的文献少得令人失望,这三个对比没有得到持续的学术分析和批评。本文旨在对遗弃法进行全面的分析。在此基础上,本文发现英美法系对不动产实物利益放弃的明文禁止存在着错误的认识。禁止放弃的法律规则应该被一种更宽容的制度所取代,在这种制度下,重要的是潜在资源的价值,以及放弃的所有者采取的步骤,以确保潜在的索赔人注意到资源的可用性。此外,应协调不动产和动产的放弃法。最后,本文批评了法律倾向于逆权占有而不是放弃作为一种转移所有权的手段,在这种情况下,这些机制可以作为替代品。在分析放弃法律并为这种做法提供有资格的辩护的过程中,本文提供了第一个可行的资源放弃定义,发展了现有制度的分类,表明放弃正值的实物和知识产权是惊人的普遍,并分析了与放弃相关的成本和收益。本文详细探讨了决定所有者是否选择放弃或其他方式来终止其对资源的权利的因素,以及应促使法律接受这些努力的考虑因素。后者包括决策成本、交易成本、衰退成本、混乱成本、无法无天的种族成本以及与放弃相关的可持续性问题。此外,通过报纸阅读的读者将会接触到一些相关的花边新闻,比如寻宝的社会规范、“制造雨水”的人类学、市政大型垃圾车的不幸衰落、密西西比州被误导的牲畜法,以及让-雅克·卢梭(Jean-Jacques Rousseau)可疑的育儿选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信