Cash found in house's walls becomes nightmare

Calvin

In Hazzard County
Super Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
13,290
Reaction score
2,542
Contractor finds $182,000 hidden in bathroom; splitting it proves difficult

081103moneyhmed2phmediusg9.jpg


In this undated photo, contractor Bob Kitts and homeowner Amanda Reece pose with money found at Reece's home in Cleveland.

CLEVELAND - A contractor who found $182,000 in Depression-era currency hidden in a bathroom wall has ended up with only a few thousand dollars, but he feels some vindication.

The windfall discovery amounted to little more than grief for contractor Bob Kitts, who couldn't agree on how to split the money with homeowner Amanda Reece.

It didn't help Reece much, either. She testified in a deposition that she was considering bankruptcy and that a bank recently foreclosed on one of her properties.

And 21 descendants of Patrick Dunne — the wealthy businessman who stashed the money that was minted in a time of bank collapses and joblessness — will each get a mere fraction of the find.

"If these two individuals had sat down and resolved their disputes and divided the money, the heirs would have had no knowledge of it," said attorney Gid Marcinkevicius, who represents the Dunne estate. "Because they were not able to sit down and divide it in a rational way, they both lost."

Kitts was tearing the bathroom walls out of an 83-year-old home near Lake Erie in 2006 when he discovered two green metal lockboxes suspended inside a wall below the medicine chest, hanging from a wire. Inside were white envelopes with the return address for "P. Dunne News Agency."

"I ripped the corner off of one," Kitts said during a deposition in a lawsuit filed by Dunne's estate. "I saw a 50 and got a little dizzy."

He called Reece, a former high school classmate who had hired him for a remodeling project.

They counted the cash and posed for photographs, both grinning like lottery jackpot winners.

But how to share? She offered 10 percent. He wanted 40 percent. From there things went sour.

A month after The Plain Dealer reported on the case in December 2007, Dunne's estate got involved, suing for the right to the money.

By then there was little left to claim.

Reece testified in a deposition that she spent about $14,000 on a trip to Hawaii and had sold some of the rare late 1920s bills. She said about $60,000 was stolen from a shoe box in her closet but testified that she never reported the theft to police.

'I didn't do anything wrong'
Kitts said Reece accused him of stealing the money and began leaving him threatening phone messages. Marcinkevicius doesn't believe the money was stolen but said he couldn't prove otherwise.

Reece's phone number has been disconnected, and her attorney Robert Lazzaro did not return a call seeking comment. There were no court records showing that Reece had filed for bankruptcy.

Kitts said he lost a lot of business because media reports on the case portrayed him as greedy, but he feels vindicated by the court's decision to give him a share.

"I was not the bad guy that everybody made me out to be," Kitts said. "I didn't do anything wrong."

He's often asked why he didn't keep his mouth shut and pocket the money. He says he wasn't raised that way.

"It was a neat experience, something that won't happen again," Kitts said. "In that regard, it was pretty fascinating; seeing that amount of money in front of you was breathtaking. In that regard, I don't regret it.

"The threats and all — that's the part that makes you wish it never happened."

Source: Cash found inside walls becomes nightmare


This is so unfortunate this has happened to those people involved and they should have think twice and find who the money belongs to. :eek3:
 
Jeez... that's what you get when you can't get along and have to whine about who gets what.

This is like that homerun ball that was caught by two guys. Both guys argued over the official claim and ended up going to court. At the end, they auctioned off the ball... but the money from the auction was not even close to covering their legal bills. :roll:
 
Too bad that the contractor had to find it cuz it seemed to complicate things. I mean, the homeowner owns the house and what was in the house belongs to her, doesnt it?


My house was built in the 1930s...I wonder if I would find the same if I do some rennovations. :hmm: Also, in the 80s, it was a drug house where people who lived here sold drugs from the house so maybe there are some drug money stashed in the walls. :laugh2:

Seriously, it was a drug house. I was ::shock: when my neighbors told me about the history of this house.
 
Yeah, that happened close to where I live. Personally I feel that if you own the house, you own all of it's contents as well.
 
Too bad that the contractor had to find it cuz it seemed to complicate things. I mean, the homeowner owns the house and what was in the house belongs to her, doesnt it?


My house was built in the 1930s...I wonder if I would find the same if I do some rennovations. :hmm: Also, in the 80s, it was a drug house where people who lived here sold drugs from the house so maybe there are some drug money stashed in the walls. :laugh2:

Seriously, it was a drug house. I was ::shock: when my neighbors told me about the history of this house.
If the contractor never found it, the homeowner would have never gotten the money.

So, 40/60 does sound like a good deal.

After all... that's $72,800 for the contractor and $109,200 for the homeowner. The homeowner would still be $36,400 ahead of the contractor.

Even if it was split 50/50, that's $91,000 per person... and that's still a lot of money. :roll:
 
If the contractor never found it, the homeowner would have never gotten the money.

So, 40/60 does sound like a good deal.

After all... that's $72,800 for the contractor and $109,200 for the homeowner. The homeowner would still be $36,400 ahead of the contractor.

Even if it was split 50/50, that's $91,000 per person... and that's still a lot of money. :roll:

It doesn't really matter. The fact is, the money was found in her house. She should be entitled to the money and none for the contractor. The contractor was hired to perform a task and he just happened to find the money on her property.

She was kind enough to offer 10%.
 
It doesn't really matter. The fact is, the money was found in her house. She should be entitled to the money and none for the contractor. The contractor was hired to perform a task and he just happened to find the money on her property.

She was kind enough to offer 10%.

That is correct. My brother and I found an ancient pistol while replacing a wall in the basement of someone's house. We reported it to the owner but didn't get rewarded. But still, we were able to sleep that night. :)
 
Keeping his mouth shut and pocketing the money is STEALING!

A 40/60 split would have been nice, but it could have been ANY contractor that found it as the homeowner could have hired ANY contractor, but she chose this specific one.

A 10% offer was also nice, but he was getting paid anyway to do a job.

I personally say the money was in her house and she should have got to keep it, because when the house was bought and sold, the money was bought and sold as well as it was a part of the house.

But because they squabbled over it, all parties lost.

If there were a cap on these type of petty lawsuits, this wouldnt happen and the law would plainly state any amout of cash found inside a home during a renovation or removal of a wall, floor, or any other structural piece, the money belongs to the CURRENT homeowner unless the homeowner chooses to relinquish the money to the original estate owner and/or their descendants.

That would end all squabbles.

By the way how would you keep $100,000 a secret? Surely someones gonna find out you've come up with a minefield of cash, plus its taxable.
 
If the contractor never found it, the homeowner would have never gotten the money.

So, 40/60 does sound like a good deal.

After all... that's $72,800 for the contractor and $109,200 for the homeowner. The homeowner would still be $36,400 ahead of the contractor.

Even if it was split 50/50, that's $91,000 per person... and that's still a lot of money. :roll:

I disagree..the house belongs to the homeowner so anything on the property should be legally hers.
 
I disagree..the house belongs to the homeowner so anything on the property should be legally hers.

I agree with you!

House within the property is owned by the current owner who found dollar bills within their property therefore it belongs to them therefore. It's like lost and found belongs to the finder.
 
By the way how would you keep $100,000 a secret? Surely someones gonna find out you've come up with a minefield of cash, plus its taxable.

I was wondering about that, the thing is... the cash came with the house. So how do one exactly tax that?

It's something to think about.
 
Back
Top