A man bought a cemetery plot in his community cemetery. When the man passed away years later, the cemetery workers began digging his grave and, in the process, uncovered a bag of gold coins that had clearly been buried there decades earlier.
Who is entitled to the money: the cemetery owners, the gravediggers, or the heirs of the man who died?
Grapple with the Gray
List two or three reasons why the cemetery should keep the money.
List two or three reasons why the gravediggers should keep the money.
List two or three reasons why the heirs should get the money.
Is there another alternative?
Having weighed the options, how would you resolve the question?
Gray Matters
From a purely legal point of view, the question depends on the terms of the contract. Does the future occupant of the grave site buy actual land or merely rights to use land that remains in the possession of the cemetery?
From an ethical point of view, the question is more nuanced.
The gold was on the cemetery’s land. Its discovery is no different from finding a gold quarry or natural gas deposit. It belongs to the owner of the land. However, cemeteries are often owned by communities, not individuals or shareholders, in which case the discovered funds should be used for the benefit of the community.
The gravediggers were simply discharging duties for which they were getting paid. In the same way that office workers have no claim on the intellectual property they are hired and paid to produce, the gravediggers have no claim to the gold.
The question then comes to the heirs. Had their father chosen a different plot of land, the gold might have remained hidden beneath the earth until all the parties involved in the story had retired or passed on.
For the preservation of a social harmony, unexpected good fortune should not be hoarded by one party but rather shared among all who had a hand in its appearance. We might consider the case of two friends who agreed to buy a lottery ticket together. Fred paid for the ticket, and George never got around to paying for his share. When the ticket became a winner, Fred questioned whether he was obligated to share his winnings with George, who had not invested in the ticket.
Although Fred might be able to advance a strictly legal claim that the ticket was all his, it would be a pretty unsavory thing to do. He would likely destroy his relationship with George in the process. Ultimately, peace among friends and neighbors overrides all but the most clear-cut questions of money.
In this case, therefore, what seems most equitable is that the lion’s share of the money remains with the cemetery and under the direction of the cemetery’s board of directors to be used for communal expenses or improvement, and that a finder’s fee be given to both the heirs and the gravediggers.