Military Rights vs. Civilian Rights

¶ … Devastator

The case is simple. Doug Champlin, a collector an owner of an airplane museum in Arizona, spent $130,000 to recover a sunken Navy RBD-1 Devastator off the coast of Florida. The plane had been lost more than 50 years prior to the salvage effort, and as such, Champlin felt that the plane belonged to him. However, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that since Congress had not officially abandoned the plane, that it still belonged to the government, and had to be turned over to the Navy. Champlin felt that if he has to give the plane to the Navy, the least they can do is reimburse him his salvage expenses. This scenario raises a couple of questions.

First, whether or not the government should be subject to the same rules and regulations concerning property as civilians. The answer is no. Special rules must be applied given that the property utilized by the government isn't owned by a single entity, but by the American people as a whole. Each citizen contributed to the purchase and operation of that airplane, and as such, it is only right that Congress, as a representative body of the people, make the decision whether or not to abandon it. In these cases, the 'Finders Keepers Rule for Finds,' which applies to "abandoned property (voluntary parting) and lost property (involuntary parting)," (Bouckaert, 1999) should not apply.

However, one must also consider that this is very similar to civilian laws regarding salvage. On August 14, 2000, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a similar ruling in the case of Adams v. Unione Mediterranea di Sicurta. They found that as the owner of a sunken cargo vessel had transferred ownership to its underwriters, and the underwriters had retained title to the cargo, that it was not in fact abandoned, and the salvors had to compensate the owners for the negligent conversion of the cargo. ("Adams")