Schley v. Couch
Supreme Court of Texas
284 S.W.2d 333 (1955)

- Written by Richard Lavigne, JD
Facts
Schley (plaintiff) purchased a house with a partially completed concrete garage floor and hired a contractor to finish the floor. Couch (defendant) was an employee of the contractor and was tasked with breaking up the soil where the new garage floor would be laid. While he was excavating the soil, Couch discovered a broken glass jar containing cash. Couch sued Schley to assert a claim to ownership of the money. A jury concluded that the money was mislaid property and that Schley, as the landowner, was the proper owner. Couch appealed and the court of appeals concluded that the money was neither lost nor mislaid property, but was properly characterized instead as treasure trove. The court of appeals reversed the circuit court and held that Couch was the proper owner as the finder of a treasure trove. Schley petitioned the Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Griffin, J.)
Concurrence (Calvert, J.)
Concurrence (Wilson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.