If A Jacket Is Stolen From Coat-Check Who Is Responsible For The Loss?

Question

If the club where the Grand Larceny occurred (coat $4,000) switches names and owners?

Coat-check ticket says not responsible for items left over night--ONLY. Incident reported that night to host and General Manager (ironically her boyfriend). Complaint filed with local prescient shortly after.

Yes...I understand that the club should be responsible. But my Q was more concerning the transfer of liability from past owner to present owner. For example, a new owner assumes a past owner’s debt, but does s/he also take on any legal matters—or one such as a stolen jacket from coat-check.

Answer 1

First glance of the above description appears to be a disclaimer which cannot be used to substitute negligence of staff duties.

Due Negligence or lack of Care of Duty, barring appropriate evidence and past trend of customer expectations of the level of service from the club, is not a valid excuse.

Transfer of ownership in full, barring escape clauses, includes the transfer of all assets and liabilities of the club.

It should also reason that all risk and rewards of the business as an enterprise in view to profit, with legal rights and obligations, are transferred.

Were legal rights and obligations not transferred to the new business formation, profits and losses in substance, would be attributable in proportion to the business arrangement in force prior to the acquisition.

In less common cases where prior management retains control, they would bear the costs and reap the rewards of enterprise.

Regardless the controlling position, the petitioner (plaintiff) has a statutory time frame to seek legal remedy through a small claims court for the above alleged claim not honoured by the defendant in view to demand relief.

Obtain professional opinion and retain evidence to bring against the defendant (the club) on grounds of lack of reasonable care of duty expected of a club or its adequacy of procedures in reasonably keeping safe the possessions of their customers; a constructive argument of precedents may be used to form the case.

Depending on the nature of customers and existing repute of the club, both positions may be vulnerable to leverage over the monetary cost of seeking legal remedy.

In the later of the above position, it will be in the interest of the company to settle out of court; services of a professional will not be required.

Lastly, once certain of the legal position, stand resolute in the face of probable barrage of excuses claimed as legal shields whilst being mindful of the time and money incurred in litigation as opposed to what one could be doing in lieu of litigation.

Answer 2

Even though the ticket says not responsible, you have a rightful claim to sue if you "paid" for the coat check. You should sue them and I guarantee you will win, because think about it, you paid them money to provide a service (hold your coat) and you received a "ticket" so that only the rightful owner of the ticket gets his/her jacket... this is a perfect case for Judge Judy... I watch that program religiously and believe me, you will win the $4000.

Answer 3

The Club is responsible...previous owners - unless the buy out by the new owners makes them responsible for previous debts

Answer 4

The club would be responsible. I would ask them for the money in a certified letter. If they refuse to pay take them to small claims court.

Answer 5

Crimes are not transferable by purchase...

It depends what the disclaimer said on the ticket, and/or what was posted on the wall...

Maybe you/she needs a new boyfriend?

Answer 6

the club is responsible

Answer 7

Get a lawyer.