## Facts

- A ranch owner hired a paving contractor to build a driveway on the ranch in Blaine County, Idaho.
- While excavating for the driveway, the contractor’s owner and an employee discovered a glass jar buried in the soil containing ninety-six paper-wrapped gold coins (dated 1857–1914).
- The coins appeared intentionally concealed for safekeeping (rolled coins in a jar estimated to be decades old), not accidentally dropped.
- The contractor and employee initially agreed to split the coins, but the contractor kept possession; their relationship deteriorated and the employee was fired.
- The employee had borrowed $9,000 from the contractor under a promissory note and claimed his supposed share of the coins secured the debt.
- The contractor later transferred the coins to the landowner in exchange for an indemnity agreement against the employee’s claims.
- The employee sued the landowner and contractor for possession of the coins and disputed liability on the promissory note.

## Issues

1. Whether buried coins found on private land should be classified as lost, mislaid, abandoned, treasure trove, or embedded property, and whether the landowner or finder has the superior right to possession.
2. Whether the employee could avoid or offset liability on a promissory note by asserting a property interest in the coins allegedly pledged as collateral.

## Decision

- The Idaho Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment awarding the coins to the landowner.
- The court held the coins were mislaid property, and also applied the embedded-property rule that items embedded in soil are deemed in the landowner’s possession.
- The court declined to apply the treasure-trove “finder” doctrine and treated traditional category distinctions as outdated for buried property on private land.
- The court affirmed summary judgment for the contractor on the promissory note (including principal, interest, and attorney fees), rejecting the employee’s claimed collateral/offset based on the coins.

## Legal Principles

- Mislaid property (intentionally placed and later not reclaimed) is possessed by the owner of the premises where it is found, to safeguard it for the true owner.
- Personal property embedded in or under the soil of privately owned land is in the legal possession of the landowner as against a finder.
- Courts may reject the treasure-trove doctrine for buried objects on private land in favor of a rule protecting landowner possession and stability of land titles.
- A party cannot pledge or use as collateral property in which the party has no legally cognizable ownership or possessory interest; an unambiguous promissory note is enforceable according to its terms.

## Conclusion

The court held that gold coins deliberately buried on private land were mislaid/embedded property possessed by the landowner rather than the worker who unearthed them, rejected treasure-trove “finders keepers,” and enforced the worker’s promissory note because he had no legal interest in the coins to secure or offset the debt.


Corliss v. Wenner, 34 P.3d 1100 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001)