State v. Polzin

Supreme Court of Washington

85 P.2d 1057 (Wash. 1939)

Relevant factsFree

Mamie Braseth gave Polzin's (defendant) loan company a $200 promissory note in exchange for $7, obligating the company to pay certain of Braseth's debts; Polzin then arranged for his separate collection agency to be hired by two of those creditors to collect the very debts his loan company already owed, without disclosing this conflict, and collected a $19 fee from the creditors for doing so while paying off Braseth's debt in full using the note proceeds. Polzin was convicted of petit larceny for taking the collection fee from the creditors and appealed.

IssueFree

Whether a defendant can be guilty of larceny if the allegedly stolen property does not actually belong to another person.

Holding & reasoning

The court resolved the question by applying the controlling rule to the facts and explaining precisely why the outcome followed. Its reasoning ties the doctrine to the record so you can reproduce the analysis on an exam.

Procedural history, concurrence & dissent

This section traces the case from the trial court through appeal and lays out how each opinion lands. Separate writings sharpen the majority's limits and flag the arguments most likely to resurface in class.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Start free Log in