What will you do about this funny case?

[Haveaniceday]

A donkey at an Algerian market ate the money of a man who came to buy him, making the unfortunate buyer and the owner wonder who the animal belongs to, an Algerian newspaper reported.
Al Shuruk al Yawmi, a newspaper published in the northern Algerian town of Tizi Ouzou, said the customer and the seller were traditionally bargaining for price for too long and failed to notice the donkey consuming the stack of banknotes meant as a payment for him.
Neither the Tizi Ouzou district court nor the city court were able to make a ruling that would satisfy both parties, so the case was passed on to the Algerian Supreme Court in the hope that it will resolve the bitter dispute.
Then what's your idea about this case?

 

[gregorylee]

Seller keeps donkey, give buyer [censored].

 

[MightbeaBuck]

resolve the bitter dispute.

At the time the donkey ate the money, he was still owned by the seller. In the U.S. the owner is responsible for anything he owned destroying anything someone else owned. Here the seller would be responsible to reimburse the buyer. Unless it could be proven that the deliberately buyer left his money in a position to have it damaged (eaten.) In compensation, the buyer could offer his donkey to the seller.

So, do you follow a lot of Algerian supreme court cases?

Seller keeps donkey, give buyer shit.

 

[ulukinatme]

Tough call here

I would say it's the buyer's fault for not keeping a closer watch on the money. If neitehr of them was paying attention to the donkey eating the money, you have to wonder if a thief could have just taken the money outright.

 

[bluechillj]

A donkey at an Algerian market ate the money of a man who came to buy him, making the unfortunate buyer and the owner wonder who the animal belongs to, an Algerian newspaper reported.
Al Shuruk al Yawmi, a newspaper published in the northern Algerian town of Tizi Ouzou, said the customer and the seller were traditionally bargaining for price for too long and failed to notice the donkey consuming the stack of banknotes meant as a payment for him.
Neither the Tizi Ouzou district court nor the city court were able to make a ruling that would satisfy both parties, so the case was passed on to the Algerian Supreme Court in the hope that it will resolve the bitter dispute.
Then what's your idea about this case?

I noticed you are posting this all over the place on different forums....how come, are you doing research or something?

 

[Gatorubet]

The Louisiana Civil Code is different from the UCC in that the risk of loss stays with the seller until the buyer takes physical possession, reason being the buyer could not have means of protecting the property and so the risk of loss should lie with the party having some control over the harm. The Common Law types favor the seller if there is damage to the property sold after the transaction had occurred prior to the ingestion of $$ by the donkey, but then they always demand that $1 and other valuable consideration, which arguably never was consumated.

But here you have the element of the donkey destroying the buyer's money, for which the seller should be liable since he owned the instrument that damaged the money, set against the comparative fault of the buyer in leaving the cash with access by the donkey, who are well known to eat anything.

Plus, at what point in the bargaining process was the money actually consumed - had a bargain been made yet? And where was Ty Willingham and what was he doing?

I need a hefty retainer to examine all of the possible angles. I think one of them should give me some serious money to think about it.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

Were they american $? If so, that is less $ in circulation and my money is now worth more. I think this donkey is awesome.

 

[MaxBuck]

I think the buyer and seller were both at risk because they ASSumed the money would be available when the sale was consummated.

 

[Mike80]

Kill his Ass.

 

[Taosman]

Donkey steaks?

 

[martinss01]