XII. Conclusion

This comparison of the underlying principles used by Jewish and common law in the field of returning lost or misplaced property provokes a number of fascinating insights: As is commonly observed, Jewish law imposes duties in situations where the common law does not; so too, Jewish law is willing to use the law to advance ethical values not normally considered as "law" by the common law. Jewish law is quicker to infuse morality and religion into even the most technical areas of the law.

What is startling is that a comparison of Jewish law with the common law in the area of returning lost property reveals that there are many areas of near identity in the legal rules: in fact, the overlap is nearly astonishing. Jewish law and common law provide very similar or identical answers to eleven of the thirteen questions posed, or an 84% overlap. As shown in Chart A, Jewish law and New York law provide very similar or identical answers to only two of the thirteen basic questions posed or an overlap of 16%. Common law and New York law provide very similar or identical answers to four of the thirteen questions posed, for an overlap of 32%.¹²⁹