If the Langbords win their lawsuit do you think any 1964 D Peace Dollars will surface?
SanctionII
Posts: 12,888 ✭✭✭✭✭
If so, under what circumstances would these coins surface in the USA (as opposed to overseas)?
Here is my pronostication of what may/should happen if a possessor of a 1964 D Peace Dollar wanted to go public in the USA.
FIRST, seek legal counsel (duhhhhhhhh).
If the Langbords win their case after a full trial on the merits and after all appeals are decided, [with the full legal record of the Langbord case at the trial and appellate levels being present and available for review], any person with possession of a 1964 D Peace Dollar would want to consult with counsel (probably Mr. Berke since he has represented by Stephen Fenton and the Langbords) and have counsel review the Langbord case materials and the prior Fenton case materials. Evaluate the legal positions taken by the Government in the Fenton and Langbord cases and then keep that information tucked away for future use.
Have counsel also do a factual investigation about all things related to the 1964 D Peace Dollar, including investigating the facts relayed by the possessor of the 1964 D Peace Dollar, his/her family, and all other persons who have some connection to the Denver Mint and its production of the coins in May, 1965. Further, seek and retain experts on the topic who can provide a a summary of the current historical record and who can dig further into the historical record to uncover nuggets of information that can help you (i.e. RWB).
After consulting with experts and doing the best factual investigation possible, determine what the applicable law is that would apply to the case [both procedural law and substantive law]. It may be that a repeat of the Langbord case strategy would be in order [particularly if the government would have to file a CAFRA forfeiture proceeding and the government would have the burden to "prove" how the specific 1964 D Peace Dollar left the mint].
If evidence exists that supports the conclusion that mint employees were allowed to purchase 1964 D Peace Dollars and that they did so, then it would seem that any 1964 D Peace Dollar so purchased by a mint employee would be considered "validly issued" by the mint and "legal".
If the next day the Mint requested or even ordered its employees to return any 1964 D Peace Dollar that they had purchased the day before, any compliance by the employee(s) with such request or order (or even non compliance) would not, in my mind, negate the conclusion that the purchased coins were "validly issued" and "legal". The above scenario raises legal questions of the extent of the legal authority and power of the government (as employer) over its employees in the area of the employees' private property.
Even if there is no evidence that the mint allowed its employees to purchase a 1964 D Peace Dollar and that such purchases took place, there would still be questions about how any particular 1964 D Peace Dollar left the Denver Mint; and legal arguments about who has to prove what.
Any legal dispute over 1964 D Peace Dollars would be more interesting factually because it is much more recent than the 1933 double eagles. There may be multiple persons alive today who worked at the Denver Mint in 1965 who could testify at deposition and/or trial.
SECOND, after consulting and retaining counsel, formulate your legal strategy; your public relations strategy; and if you or your attorney or your experts have political connectons in Congress or the Senate consider pursuing a political/legislative solution.
THIRD, after formulating your strategy, implement it by "going public". As part of going public, publish high quality photographs and/or video of the coin(s) and if possible put them on public display.
FOURTH, hang on for a fun ride.
Your turn.
Here is my pronostication of what may/should happen if a possessor of a 1964 D Peace Dollar wanted to go public in the USA.
FIRST, seek legal counsel (duhhhhhhhh).
If the Langbords win their case after a full trial on the merits and after all appeals are decided, [with the full legal record of the Langbord case at the trial and appellate levels being present and available for review], any person with possession of a 1964 D Peace Dollar would want to consult with counsel (probably Mr. Berke since he has represented by Stephen Fenton and the Langbords) and have counsel review the Langbord case materials and the prior Fenton case materials. Evaluate the legal positions taken by the Government in the Fenton and Langbord cases and then keep that information tucked away for future use.
Have counsel also do a factual investigation about all things related to the 1964 D Peace Dollar, including investigating the facts relayed by the possessor of the 1964 D Peace Dollar, his/her family, and all other persons who have some connection to the Denver Mint and its production of the coins in May, 1965. Further, seek and retain experts on the topic who can provide a a summary of the current historical record and who can dig further into the historical record to uncover nuggets of information that can help you (i.e. RWB).
After consulting with experts and doing the best factual investigation possible, determine what the applicable law is that would apply to the case [both procedural law and substantive law]. It may be that a repeat of the Langbord case strategy would be in order [particularly if the government would have to file a CAFRA forfeiture proceeding and the government would have the burden to "prove" how the specific 1964 D Peace Dollar left the mint].
If evidence exists that supports the conclusion that mint employees were allowed to purchase 1964 D Peace Dollars and that they did so, then it would seem that any 1964 D Peace Dollar so purchased by a mint employee would be considered "validly issued" by the mint and "legal".
If the next day the Mint requested or even ordered its employees to return any 1964 D Peace Dollar that they had purchased the day before, any compliance by the employee(s) with such request or order (or even non compliance) would not, in my mind, negate the conclusion that the purchased coins were "validly issued" and "legal". The above scenario raises legal questions of the extent of the legal authority and power of the government (as employer) over its employees in the area of the employees' private property.
Even if there is no evidence that the mint allowed its employees to purchase a 1964 D Peace Dollar and that such purchases took place, there would still be questions about how any particular 1964 D Peace Dollar left the Denver Mint; and legal arguments about who has to prove what.
Any legal dispute over 1964 D Peace Dollars would be more interesting factually because it is much more recent than the 1933 double eagles. There may be multiple persons alive today who worked at the Denver Mint in 1965 who could testify at deposition and/or trial.
SECOND, after consulting and retaining counsel, formulate your legal strategy; your public relations strategy; and if you or your attorney or your experts have political connectons in Congress or the Senate consider pursuing a political/legislative solution.
THIRD, after formulating your strategy, implement it by "going public". As part of going public, publish high quality photographs and/or video of the coin(s) and if possible put them on public display.
FOURTH, hang on for a fun ride.
Your turn.
0
Comments
Kewpie Doll award-10/29/2007
Successful BST transactions with Coinboy and Wondercoin.
FWIW - at present it is impossible to state that all the 1964-D dollars were destroyed. Denver accounted for them by weight and there are discrepancies.
[Uhmmmm...I charge a modest retainer (by legal biz standards, that is) and an hourly fee plus expenses. ]
It is my impression that Mint policies and record keeping were much more lax in the case of the Saints. And it appears that there was a window - both figuratively, in terms of opportunity, and literally, at the Mint - by which the Saints could have been obtained legally.
If such a window existed for the Peace Dollars, it was apparently much more narrow. It seems that Mint employees could not have removed/kept them legally. If that is the case, the remaining window of legality might be if someone of importance had been given an example. If documentation of such is lacking, I expect that anyone claiming legal ownership would have a huge uphill battle.
I realize that arguments could be made about Peace Dollars having accidentally escaped the Mint, etc., but don't feel that they would fly.
All of the above, notwithstanding, I would love it if an example surfaced and its legality, adjudicated.
If I had one I think I'd come forth with it, claim it was in some old dead relative's jacket pocket and let the chips fall where they may. Worst thing that could happen is your name got attached to one of the greatest coin finds in history. You could lose the coin but you'd forever be the discoverer of it and of course you may NOT lose the coin.
However, coming forth and saying "This is mine and it escaped the mint under legal means........." is probably just going to get you arrested.
John
Never view my other linked pages. They aren't coin related.
<< <i>Any legal dispute over 1964 D Peace Dollars would be more interesting factually because it is much more recent than the 1933 double eagles. There may be multiple persons alive today who worked at the Denver Mint in 1965 who could testify at deposition and/or trial. >>
I agree with this. However, we should remember that Mint employees may testify either or both ways. For example Roger provided the following in an earlier thread:
<< <i>Former Denver Mint employee Michael Lantz discussed these in a Coin World article a couple of years ago. He was present when the coins were struck and can provide details about the location of the press room, types of presses used, etc. He also answered questions about them at the ANA in Denver. Mr. Lantz also believes that the story about employees being able to buy 2 of the new dollars is actually a transference of what was permitted for the new Kennedy halves. He said no one was allowed to purchase, trade, exchange or otherwise acquire any of the 1964-D peace dollars. He also said that several (exact quantity not specified) were sent to the Director in Washington, but he does not know what happened to these. >>
Right now, it seems like the employee sale story is hearsay and there are Mint employees stating those sales did not happen. It would be interesting to see whether this and or other scenarios can be proved. For example, it would be interesting to find out if anyone contacted Fern Miller to confirm the Dan Brown story.
<< <i>Mr. Lantz was interviewed for the Peace dollar book, and reviewed the chapter for accuracy. All of the key information he provided could be independently verified. >>
It's good to hear people are interested in verifiable information. I'm also definitely starting to get interested in reading this book.
Does this mean the Dan Brown / Fern Miller story is a dead end?
No. It just means that no one has been able to corroborate the story.
<< <i>
<< <i>Does this mean the Dan Brown / Fern Miller story is a dead end? >>
No. It just means that no one has been able to corroborate the story. >>
Has anyone contacted Fern Miller for corroboration?
Was anyone available to independently verify Lantz's story that no one was allowed to purchase, trade, exchange or otherwise acquire any of the 1964-D peace dollars?