Also known as: tortious conversions · conversion
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A tort consisting of the intentional exercise of dominion or control over personal property in a manner that seriously interferes with the true owner's right to control it. The tort does not transfer title from the true owner to the converter or to any subsequent transferee.
Tristan Thompson took possession of specialized equipment sold by Twin Rivers Bank. Before paying he sold the equipment to a third party and refused to return it. The court held Thompson liable for conversion because his dominion seriously interfered with the bank's retained title and right to control the chattels.
Tyler Taylor intentionally smashed the specialized machinery he had borrowed from Thunderbolt Motors for a single permitted repair job. The court found Taylor liable for conversion because the destruction changed the chattel's identity and deprived Thunderbolt Motors of its right to immediate possession.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Travis Tate as bailee intentionally used trust-owned equipment for personal commercial gain far beyond any permitted scope. The court found conversion because the unauthorized dominion seriously interfered with the beneficiary's right to control the chattels.
Trevor Tate took delivery of a fleet of vehicles from Threshold Capital under a lease allowing only local use. He immediately resold several trucks to out-of-state buyers. The court held the resale constituted conversion because it seriously violated the owner's right to control the chattels.
Tyrone Tran leased delivery trucks from True North Logistics for local routes only. He used them for long-haul interstate freight in direct violation of the lease terms. The court held that the serious violation of the owner's control rights constituted conversion even though Tran had initially obtained lawful possession.
Timothy Tang borrowed commercial equipment from Twin Rivers Bank for a limited inspection. He then refused to return it and claimed ownership. The court applied conversion doctrine and required Tang to pay damages for the serious interference with the bank's right to control the chattels.
No. Tortious conversion of personal property does not deprive the true owner of her title. One who lacks title cannot pass good title even to a bona fide purchaser except in narrow cases involving money or negotiable instruments.
Supporting sources
Intentional destruction that changes the chattel's identity or character, or use that constitutes a serious violation of the owner's right to control the chattel, subjects the actor to liability for conversion to a person in possession or entitled to immediate possession.
The actor must intentionally exercise dominion or control. No specific intent to harm the owner is needed. Liability arises when the interference with the owner's rights is serious, as when the chattel is destroyed or used in a manner exceeding any authorization.
…Rule Civ. Proc. 12 (b), converted into a Rule 56 motion for summary judgment. In terms, the portion of Rule 12 (b) concerning conversion to a Rule 56 motion applies only to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, and not to a motion to dismiss for other reasons. At any rate, respondents filed no…