In unknown owner situations, when might liability still apply?

In unknown owner situations, when might liability still apply?

• A. If the owner is unknown and there is no knowledge of theft.
• B. If the buyer has a receipt.
• C. If the true owner is identifiable but the goods were obtained knowing they are stolen or under circumstances indicating knowledge.
• D. If the goods are clearly not stolen.

Answer: (C)

The main idea being tested is that liability for handling stolen goods rests on knowledge of the theft. Even when the owner is unknown, you can still be liable if you actually know the goods are stolen or you obtained them under circumstances that would put a reasonable person on notice of theft. This is why the correct choice points to a situation where the true owner could be identified but the goods were obtained with knowledge of theft or under circumstances indicating knowledge—the key factor is awareness or constructive awareness. If there’s no knowledge and no warning signs, liability doesn’t attach; simply having a receipt or there being an “apparent” owner isn’t enough to override the knowledge element.

The main idea being tested is that liability for handling stolen goods rests on knowledge of the theft. Even when the owner is unknown, you can still be liable if you actually know the goods are stolen or you obtained them under circumstances that would put a reasonable person on notice of theft. This is why the correct choice points to a situation where the true owner could be identified but the goods were obtained with knowledge of theft or under circumstances indicating knowledge—the key factor is awareness or constructive awareness. If there’s no knowledge and no warning signs, liability doesn’t attach; simply having a receipt or there being an “apparent” owner isn’t enough to override the knowledge element.