1.   The accused has appropriated one of the rights of the owner, the right to sell the article.

2.   The Court of Appeal held that there was no theft because the accused had not appropriated the property.

3.   The accused has not appropriated a thing in action, because the bank did not owe the money to anyone.

4.   When the accused appropriates, he will have stolen the property from the person who retained the interest in the property.