Replevin or detinue

[Steven R Marino]

Jurisdiction

Illinois

I am preparing for a civil case in which a personal seat license ownership is not being transferred over to me by someone who is currently registered as the owner. When this seat license was originally purchased I paid for it back in 2002 but had the season ticket mailed to someone else out of convenience. It was generally expected that at some point in the future I would request the ownership change and have been trying to get the current owner to transfer the ownership back to me for 2 years now and they refuse to do that. I have many documents, especially emails, in which he has acknowledged me as the owner, but he won't fill out the necessary paperwork to make the transition. Hence, I need to use the court system for assistance in getting my personal seat license back.

The main question I have at this point is whether I file my case as replevin or detinue. I have already sent a demand letter to the defendant as a first step and in that demand letter I'm asking for the ownership transfer to be made or for the defendant to pay the market value of my PSL which is around an estimated $17,000.00. If my demand is not met I an going to file the complaint officially and am willing to accept one of the 2 possible outcomes noted above. So is this a replevin case or a detinue case? Which one would be the proper filing?

 

[army judge]

The main question I have at this point is whether I file my case as replevin or detinue.

If your property has been wrongfully taken, you can ask the court to have the property returned to you.

This action is known as "replevin."

You must be the legal owner of the property, meaning you bought it yourself or someone gave it to you as a gift.

The property must be able to be:

Moved
Identified
Returned

If the property in question is a seat in a public/private sports venue you ONLY are granted a license to USE the seat during CERTAIN sports competitions.

You in NO way own, NOR will you ever own the seat.

In my view, if you seek a remedy in replevin, the court has no ability to grant it by definition of the tort "replevin".

Let's discuss the "detinue" remedy.

If collateral cannot be located, a detinue proceeding is the preferred action.

A detinue complaint asks the court to issue an order to the debtor or other person in possession to surrender the property directly to the creditor/OWNER so that it is not necessary to know where the collateral is, only the location of the person in possession.

The court can hold the debtor or other person in contempt of court for refusing to surrender the collateral.

I see detinue as a better remedy to recover your property, which is the right to use the "season ticket".

However, there can sometimes be no easy legal remedy to certain dilemmas in which human beings find themselves embroiled.


Have you spoken with the venue about the issue?
What has the venue advised?
It might be worth your time to see if the venue has an administrative remedy allowing you to avoid often unsatisfying litigation.

 

[adjusterjack]

When this seat license was originally purchased I paid for it back in 2002 but had the season ticket mailed to someone else out of convenience. It was generally expected that at some point in the future I would request the ownership change

Where is your written agreement with that person that it would be returned to you at your request.

"Generally expected" means nothing.

I have many documents, especially emails, in which he has acknowledged me as the owner,

How long ago were those documents written?

Seems to me that the person has several defenses: gift, laches, waiver, abandonment, statute of limitations.

Good luck.

 

[Steven R Marino]

Where is your written agreement with that person that it would be returned to you at your request.

"Generally expected" means nothing.



How long ago were those documents written?

Seems to me that the person has several defenses: gift, laches, waiver, abandonment, statute of limitations.

Good luck.

The documents are all emails that have been written or responded to in the last 2 years in trying to get the ownership change and I got so far as to have him fill out the ownership transfer which identified the seat license he was transferring to me and he accepted the $100 administrative fee to make the transfer. But he never sent it in. By the way, I've been paying for this seat for 47 years as a season ticket holder and I also payed the psl license fee back in 2002 when it was required by season ticket holders to finance the new stadium. Unfortunately, I don't have the cancelled check for that license.

 

[Steven R Marino]

If your property has been wrongfully taken, you can ask the court to have the property returned to you.

This action is known as "replevin."

You must be the legal owner of the property, meaning you bought it yourself or someone gave it to you as a gift.

The property must be able to be:

Moved
Identified
Returned

If the property in question is a seat in a public/private sports venue you ONLY are granted a license to USE the seat during CERTAIN sports competitions.

You in NO way own, NOR will you ever own the seat.

In my view, if you seek a remedy in replevin, the court has no ability to grant it by definition of the tort "replevin".

Let's discuss the "detinue" remedy.

If collateral cannot be located, a detinue proceeding is the preferred action.

A detinue complaint asks the court to issue an order to the debtor or other person in possession to surrender the property directly to the creditor/OWNER so that it is not necessary to know where the collateral is, only the location of the person in possession.

The court can hold the debtor or other person in contempt of court for refusing to surrender the collateral.

I see detinue as a better remedy to recover your property, which is the right to use the "season ticket".

However, there can sometimes be no easy legal remedy to certain dilemmas in which human beings find themselves embroiled.


Have you spoken with the venue about the issue?
What has the venue advised?
It might be worth your time to see if the venue has an administrative remedy allowing you to avoid often unsatisfying litigation.

If your property has been wrongfully taken, you can ask the court to have the property returned to you.

This action is known as "replevin."

You must be the legal owner of the property, meaning you bought it yourself or someone gave it to you as a gift.

The property must be able to be:

Moved
Identified
Returned

If the property in question is a seat in a public/private sports venue you ONLY are granted a license to USE the seat during CERTAIN sports competitions.

You in NO way own, NOR will you ever own the seat.

In my view, if you seek a remedy in replevin, the court has no ability to grant it by definition of the tort "replevin".

Let's discuss the "detinue" remedy.

If collateral cannot be located, a detinue proceeding is the preferred action.

A detinue complaint asks the court to issue an order to the debtor or other person in possession to surrender the property directly to the creditor/OWNER so that it is not necessary to know where the collateral is, only the location of the person in possession.

The court can hold the debtor or other person in contempt of court for refusing to surrender the collateral.

I see detinue as a better remedy to recover your property, which is the right to use the "season ticket".

However, there can sometimes be no easy legal remedy to certain dilemmas in which human beings find themselves embroiled.


Have you spoken with the venue about the issue?
What has the venue advised?
It might be worth your time to see if the venue has an administrative remedy allowing you to avoid often unsatisfying litigation.

 

[Steven R Marino]

The venue does offer an easy way to transfer the ownership for a $100 fee and that's not the problem. It's trying to get the person that my PSL is registered to to send in that form. I've got written documentation in emails that he does acknowledge I'm the owner but I don't have a canceled check for the psl as it goes back to 2002. I've also got written acknowledgements from the psl owners to the right of me(my brothers) that I'm the owner. The psl was close to $4000. This particular season ticket I've had for 47 years and with the psl being required payment in 2002 for season ticket holders.

Thanks for the feedback. THat helps.

 

[Steven R Marino]

If your property has been wrongfully taken, you can ask the court to have the property returned to you.

This action is known as "replevin."

You must be the legal owner of the property, meaning you bought it yourself or someone gave it to you as a gift.

The property must be able to be:

Moved
Identified
Returned

If the property in question is a seat in a public/private sports venue you ONLY are granted a license to USE the seat during CERTAIN sports competitions.

You in NO way own, NOR will you ever own the seat.

In my view, if you seek a remedy in replevin, the court has no ability to grant it by definition of the tort "replevin".

Let's discuss the "detinue" remedy.

If collateral cannot be located, a detinue proceeding is the preferred action.

A detinue complaint asks the court to issue an order to the debtor or other person in possession to surrender the property directly to the creditor/OWNER so that it is not necessary to know where the collateral is, only the location of the person in possession.

The court can hold the debtor or other person in contempt of court for refusing to surrender the collateral.

I see detinue as a better remedy to recover your property, which is the right to use the "season ticket".

However, there can sometimes be no easy legal remedy to certain dilemmas in which human beings find themselves embroiled.


Have you spoken with the venue about the issue?
What has the venue advised?
It might be worth your time to see if the venue has an administrative remedy allowing you to avoid often unsatisfying litigation.

 

[Steven R Marino]

What do you mean by collateral being posted?

 

[army judge]

What do you mean by collateral being posted?

In your case you don't own anything.
You have a license to use the seat.
Destinue seems to be the appropriate remedy to pursue.
As Adjuster Jack hinted, the other party might have certain affirmative defenses which could be used to deny you any remedy at law.
Of all the possible remedies, detinue is the only one applicable.
Replevin is used to secure property you own being held by another party.
All your adversary here is doing is denying you use of the seat you allowed him to use it, however for decades.

You need to have a detailed discussion with the venue, because your leech keeps taking money you give the rat to right this wrong.

Don't be deceived, detinue is a remedy, but you might have no legal remedy in the end.

If you can't use the seat(s), why keep paying to allow the grifter to use it(them)?

If you simply stopped paying, I suspect the roach won't pay, so the seat(s) would likely go on the block.

That is why you need to see if the venue has other ways to help you.

 

[Steven R Marino]

In your case you don't own anything.
You have a license to use the seat.
Destinue seems to be the appropriate remedy to pursue.
As Adjuster Jack hinted, the other party might have certain affirmative defenses which could be used to deny you any remedy at law.
Of all the possible remedies, detinue is the only one applicable.
Replevin is used to secure property you own being held by another party.
All your adversary here is doing is denying you use of the seat you allowed him to use it, however for decades.

You need to have a detailed discussion with the venue, because your leech keeps taking money you give the rat to right this wrong.

Don't be deceived, detinue is a remedy, but you might have no legal remedy in the end.

If you can't use the seat(s), why keep paying to allow the grifter to use it(them)?

If you simply stopped paying, I suspect the roach won't pay, so the seat(s) would likely go on the block.

That is why you need to see if the venue has other ways to help you.

 

[Steven R Marino]

I should clarify something here. He isn't using my season ticket. I pay for it year in and year out and can go to the games. I've been doing this for 47 years. So he's not a rat in that sense. My objection is that he doesn't put this seat in my name. So in every sense I'm the season ticket holder except in the eyes of the venue. I want that recognition.

 

[ElleMD]

So for 47 years your "friend" has had a seat in his name and NOW you want it in yours despite the fact that for reasons that don't make any sense, you put it in his. You are able to use the seat even though it is in his name.

 

[Steven R Marino]

So for 47 years your "friend" has had a seat in his name and NOW you want it in yours despite the fact that for reasons that don't make any sense, you put it in his. You are able to use the seat even though it is in his name.

Here's more background.

 

[Steven R Marino]

There are 4 season tickets that have been in my family for many years and they are side by side in a certain section of the venue. For the last 47 years we have all paid for our season ticket and go to most games. Back in 2002 and in order to keep our season tickets we were required to pay for 4 personal seat licenses and each us paid for our own psl and as such, we were able to keep our season tickets at the new stadium. All of our psl payments were mailed into one person of our group of 4 who registered the PSLs in his name in 2002 and had all 4 tickets mailed to his home every year. And we all continue to pay for our season ticket by mailing our checks to this one person who is the only person on the account.

Because I am close to retiring I am the one that requested an ownership change as I wanted the seat license in my name for the trust I was putting together. All four of us have acknowledged in writing that we each own 1 PSL and I season ticket out of the 4 but I can't get the person on our account to send in the form that would change the ownership to my name. This is why I am suing.

Hope that sheds more light on this situation.

 

[ElleMD]

You put it in his name back in 2002. It's been 17 years. It is his license even if you had a handshake agreement 17 years ago that it would be "yours" one day. It still makes no sense that you would put it in his name rather than yours own all those years ago, nor why you waited a decade and a half to remedy it. Either way, for 17 years it has been his. You are going to have a very difficult time forcing him to relinquish this to you all these years later. His emails are going to mean virtually nothing.