Prosser, p. 78-87: Conversion
(A)
Nature
of the Tort
Case: Pearson v. Dodd
The Restatement tries to spell out what makes
a particular interference with chattels into a conversion:
·
One
way to smell a conversion is the “serious interference” test. How serious does the interference have to
be? It must be serious enough that
damages for the full market price of the chattel should be awarded. That seems like a suspiciously circular
definition.
·
Some
other criteria for identifying a conversion include how long the actor had
control of the chattel, how long the interference lasted, the actor’s good
faith, how much harm was done to the chattel, and how inconvenience was caused
to the other person.
The Restatement also lists ways that a
chattel may be converted:
1.
Stealing
it
2.
Damaging
it
3.
Using
it
4.
Buying
it from a thief
5.
Selling
it to somebody else
6.
Delivering
it to the wrong person
7.
Refusing
to return it
(B)Effect of Good Faith
If you
deliver goods to the wrong person (like someone in disguise) or buy something
from a thief, you may still be liable for conversion even if you acted in good
faith.
(C)
Necessity
of Demand; Return of Chattel
In a
few jurisdictions, the owner of a chattel must demand their property back from
the possessor and be rejected. In most jurisdictions,
conversion happens as soon as someone unlawfully takes possession of the
chattel.
If
the possessor gives the chattel back to the owner, it doesn’t bar an action for
conversion, but the damages will be mitigated.
The owner doesn’t have to accept the return of the goods, except that in
some jurisdictions, if the conversion was innocent and the chattel wasn’t damaged,
the owner must take back the goods and won’t have an action for conversion.
(D)
Damages
If
something gets converted from yours to theirs, you’re due the full value of the
property converted. How this is
calculated can very, but usually it’s done by market price. It’s kind of analogous to the rule in contracts
that the owner ought to mitigate damages by buying a suitable replacement soon
after the conversion.
Though
the property may have special value to the owner, only market price may be
recovered unless the defendant’s conduct is outrageous, in which case the plaintiff
may be able to get damages for emotional harm.
Hypothetical: Bush v. Simpson
(E) What May Be Converted
Conversion
originated from trover, which applied to things that can be “lost and found”. However, conversion has now been extended to
apply to intangibles such as stock holdings.
(F) Who May Maintain the Action
Anyone
who has the chattel when it’s converted can sue for conversion. One converter can even recover from
another. Usually, the plaintiff can show
some right to the converted good.