Question: Title. William Bisby gave an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) to Del City Cycle in Enid, Oklahoma, to sell on his behalf. Joseph Maddox bought the ATV, but paid for it with a check written on a closed checking account. The bank refused to honor the check. Before Del City or Bisby could reclaim the ATV, however, Maddox sold it to Aaron Jordan, who sold it to Shannon Skaggs. In November 2003, the Enid Police Department seized the ATV from Skaggs. Bisby filed a suit in an Oklahoma state court against the state and Skaggs, claiming that he was the owner of the ATV and asking the court to return it to him. Skaggs objected. Is there a distinction between the ownership interests of a party who steals an item and a party who acquires the item with a check that is not honored? What was the status of Skaggs's title, if any, to the ATV? Which of the many parties involved in this case should the court rule has "good" title to the ATV? Why? [State v. Skaggs, 140 P.3d 576 (Okla.Civ.App. Div. 3 2006)]