I thought our readers would enjoy reading this casuitical (I hope I’m coining a new word there) exploration from the St. Philipine Duschene Latin Mass Community’s bulletin. It considers the question of restitution at a depth which I did not know it had.

The basic rule: A man in bad faith has to make restitution for ALL the foreseeable damage caused to the lawful owner. He’s responsible for the damage, so he has to fix it.

For example: Suppose a man steals a lawnmower – that is used by the actual owner – for a lawn mowing business – but while the thief had the lawnmower, he painted it, not because it needed paint, but to make sure he didn’t get caught with a stolen lawnmower. Then, he had it tuned up since it was running a little rough, and this tune-up was definitely very useful. Then, since the blade was so dinged up it hardly cut, he put a new blade on the mower. And after putting all this into this stolen lawnmower, he repented. What does the thief have to do for restitution?

1) The thief has to return the thing itself, if it still exists: the stolen lawnmower.

2) If it no longer exists, he has to restore the equivalent value.

3) He still has to restore the profit which the owner would have made, or reimburse him for the loss he suffered – in this case, the money lost from being unable to work has to be restored to the owner.

4) But he can deduct any useful or necessary expenses – a useful expense improves the item; a necessary expense preserves it. For example, the tune-up was a useful expense; the new blade was a necessary expense. But the paint wasn’t either useful or necessary but only done for the sake of camouflage, so he can’t deduct that expense.

Now, suppose an entirely different situation: Imagine a rustler who steals about 20 head of cows… and then, 2 years later, he repents. What is he responsible for?

1) A thief has to return the thing itself, if it still exists: in this case, 20 head of cows – not calves, not bulls, not steers.

2) If it no longer exists, he has to restore the equivalent value. So, if he sold some of the cows, he has to replace that same number.

3) He has to restore the profit which the owner would have made, or reimburse him for the loss he suffered – in this case, the money lost from not having those 2 years of a calf – crop.

4) He can deduct any useful or necessary expenses – a useful expense improves the item; a necessary expense preserves it. For example, veterinary bills and pasturage. AND

5) He has to restore all the natural products of the property.

What are natural products? Something produced naturally, by the very nature of the creature. In the case of cattle, the natural products of beef cows are calves. The natural products of Milk cows – milk and calves…. For an apple tree, it’s apples… for a peach tree, it’s the peaches, for a hay field, the hay, and so forth… So this rustler has to return any calves, heifers, steers or bulls born out of those 20 head since he stole them. He can’t keep them. He can’t build up a herd on stolen cattle. They have to go back; they belong to the original owner. He can’t profit on his rustling.

Let’s sum up the rules for restitution: The unjust possessor of another’s goods must restore the thing itself if it still exists; if not he must restore the equivalent value. He has to restore the profit which the owner would have made, or reimburse him for the loss he suffered. He can deduct any useful or necessary expenses. And finally, he must also restore all the natural products of the property.

go to main page