T3 - Int Ts to Property

Question 1

INTENTIONAL TORTS TO PROPERTY

Answer 1

• Trespass to Land
• Trespass to Chattel
• Conversion

Question 2

TRESPASS TO LAND: Elements

Answer 2

The key testable elements for trespass to land are:
• Physical invasion
• Of the plaintiff’s real property

Question 3

Trespass to land: KEY

Answer 3

• Act of Physical invasion
• of land

Question 4

Trespass to land: Prima Facie Case

Answer 4

Prima Facie Case
To establish a prima facie case for trespass to land, the following elements must be proved:
1) An act of physical invasion of plaintiff’s real property by defendant;
2) Intent on defendant’s part to bring about a physical invasion of plaintiff’s real property; and
3) Causation.

Question 5

Trespass to land: Physical Invasion

Answer 5

2 Methods of physical invasion:
- By person (vehicle, horse, etc.)
- By object (invasion must be tangible).

The invasion may be by a person or object (for example, throwing a baseball onto the plaintiff’s land is a trespass).
If intangible matter (for example, vibrations or odor) enters, the plaintiff may have a case for nuisance, but not for trespass since those things are not considered physical.

a) DefendantNeedNotEnterontoLand: It is not necessary that the defendant personally come onto the land; e.g., trespass exists where defendant floods plaintiff’s land, throws rocks onto it, or chases third persons onto it.
b) Lawful Right of Entry Expires: A trespass to land may also exist where defendant remains on plaintiff’s land after an otherwise lawful right of entry has lapsed.

If No Physical Object Enters Land: If no physical object has entered onto plaintiff’s land, e.g., damage resulted from blasting concussions, the courts generally do not treat the controversy as a trespass case. Rather, they treat it as a nuisance case or as a case of strict liability if ultrahazardous activities are involved.

Question 6

Trespass to land:

Awareness of boundary.

What is the intent needed?

Answer 6

Awareness of boundary is not needed. Still liable.

Only intent is that you got to location by some deliberate act.

Question 7

“of Land:

Answer 7

• Land includes the AIR above, the SOIL beneath - to a reasonable distance

Question 8

Trespass to land: Real Property.

Includes?

Right to bring claim belongs to who?

Answer 8

• Land includes the AIR above, the SOIL beneath - to a reasonable distance

Real property includes not only the surface, but also airspace and subterranean space for a reasonable distance.
Note that the trespass claim belongs to the person with the right to possess the property, and not necessarily the owner, meaning that if you enter a rented apartment without permission, the tenant has a claim against you, not the landlord.

Courts generally construe plaintiff’s “land” to include air space and subsurface space to the height or depth plaintiff can make beneficial use of such space. Thus, for example, one could commit a trespass by stringing wires over the land, flying an airplane at low altitudes over it, tunneling under it, etc.

Question 9

Trespass to land: Intent

Answer 9

The defendant need intend only to enter onto that particular piece of land. The defendant need not know that the land belonged to another.

DELIBERATE ACT is required. Only intent needed is that you got to location by some deliberate act.

Mistake as to the lawfulness of the entry is no defense as long as defendant intended the entry upon that particular piece of land.
Intent to trespass is not required—intent to enter onto the land is sufficient.

Question 10

Relying on boundary markers fixed by a reputable surveyor, Farmer clears land for cultivation that he believes to be his. In fact, the survey was in error and Farmer cleared a portion of Neighbor’s land. Liable?

Answer 10

Relying on boundary markers fixed by a reputable surveyor, Farmer clears land for cultivation that he believes to be his. In fact, the survey was in error and Farmer cleared a portion of Neighbor’s land. Farmer is liable to Neighbor for trespass to land.

Question 11

When would you not have intent - trespass to land?

Answer 11

When you do not take deliberate act to get on the land… like you got pushed into it.

The burden is on you to know where the boundaries are.

Question 12

D is hiking through a state park when he comes to a fork in the trail and bears right. After a mile, he has left the state park and is now on private property owned by P. There was no fence, gate, sign, or natural boundary marker to let him know that he had left the park.

Answer 12

D will still be held liable to P for a trespass to land.

Question 13

Trespass to land: Who May Bring Action?

Answer 13

Who May Bring Action?
An action for trespass may be maintained by anyone in actual or constructive possession of the land.
This is so even if that possession is without title. If no one is in possession, the true owner is presumed in possession and may maintain the action.
If the action is maintained by a lessee, some decisions allow him to recover only to the extent that the trespass damages the leasehold interest.
Other cases allow a full recovery for all damage done to the property, but require the lessee to account to the lessor for excess over damages to the leasehold.

Question 14

Trespass to land: Damages Not Required

Answer 14

The plaintiff can recover without showing actual injury to the land.

Question 15

Trespass to land: Causation

Answer 15

Causation
The physical invasion of plaintiff’s property must have been legally caused by the defendant’s act or something set in motion thereby.

Question 16

Trespass to land: Transferred Intent

Answer 16

Transferred Intent
The doctrine of transferred intent applies to trespass to land.

Question 17

TRESPASS TO CHATTELS: ELEMENTS

Answer 17

The key testable element for trespass to chattels is:
• Act by the defendant that interferes with the plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel

Question 18

Trespass to Chattels: KEY

Answer 18

• Intentional interference with PLaintiff’s personal property that warrants Defenant pay damages.

Question 19

Trespass to Chattels: Prima Facie Case

Answer 19

To establish a prima facie case of trespass to chattels, the following elements must be proved:
1) An act by defendant interfering with plaintiff’s right of possession in the chattel;
2) Intent to perform the act bringing about the interference with plaintiff’s right of possession;
3) Causation; and
4) Damages.

Question 20

Trespass to Chattels: Two Types of Interference

Answer 20

Trespass to chattels is designed to protect a person against interferences with his right to possess his chattels. Hence, any act of interference will suffice. These generally take two forms:

The interference may either be an
intermeddling (that is, directly damaging the chattel) or a
dispossession (that is, depriving the P of their lawful right of possession of the chattel).

Question 21

Trespass to Chattels: Intent Required.

Mistake?

Answer 21

Intent to trespass isn’t required;
intent to do the act of interference is all that is needed.
The defendant’s mistaken belief that they own the chattel is no defense.

Mistake as to the lawfulness of defendant’s actions (e.g., a mistaken belief that defendant owns the chattel) is no defense to an action for trespass to chattels. Again, as with trespass to land, the intent to trespass is not required—intent to do the act of interference with the chattel is sufficient.

Question 22

Trespass to Chattels: Actual Damages Required

Answer 22

Actual damages—not necessarily to the chattel, but at least to a possessory right—are required.

Question 23

Trespass to Chattels: Who May Bring Trespass to Chattels Action?

Answer 23

Who May Bring Trespass to Chattels Action?
Anyone with possession or the immediate right to possession may maintain an action for trespass to chattels.

Question 24

Trespass to Chattels: Causation

Answer 24

e. Causation
The interference with plaintiff’s possessory interests in the chattel must have been caused by defendant’s act or something set in motion thereby.

Question 25

Trespass to Chattels: Actual Damages Required

Answer 25

f. Actual Damages Required
As a general rule, nominal damages will not be awarded for trespass to chattels; i.e., in the absence of any actual damages, an action will not lie. However, if the trespass amounts to a dispossession, the loss of possession itself is deemed to be an actual harm.

Question 26

Trespass to Chattels: Transferred Intent

Answer 26

g. Transferred Intent
The doctrine of transferred intent applies to trespass to chattels.

Question 27

Trespass to Chattels and Conversion Distinguished

Answer 27

h. Trespass to Chattels and Conversion Distinguished
Conversion grants relief for interferences with a chattel so serious in nature, or so serious in consequences, as to warrant requiring the defendant to pay its full value in damages. For those interferences not so serious in nature or consequences, trespass to chattels is the appropriate action.

Question 28

Conversion: KEY

Answer 28

Intentional interference with Plaintiff’s personal property so serious that warrants Defendant pay property’s full value.

Question 29

Conversion: Elements

Answer 29

The key testable elements for conversion are:
• Act by the defendant that interferes with the plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel [same as TtoC]
• Interference is serious enough in nature or consequences to warrant that the defendant pay the chattel’s full value

Question 30

Conversion: Prima Facie Case

Answer 30

To establish a prima facie case for conversion, the following elements must be proved:
1) An act by defendant interfering with plaintiff’s right of possession in the chattel;
2) Intent to perform the act bringing about the interference with plaintiff’s right of possession;
3) Causation; and
4) Damages—an interference that is serious enough in nature or consequences to warrant that the defendant pay the full value of the chattel.

Question 31

Acts of Conversion

Answer 31

Acts of conversion include wrongful acquisition (theft), wrongful transfer, wrongful detention, and substantially changing, severely damaging, or misusing a chattel.

1) Wrongful acquisition, e.g., theft, embezzlement.
2) Wrongful transfer, e.g., selling, misdelivering, pledging.
3) Wrongful detention, e.g., refusing to return to owner.
4) Substantially changing.
5) Severely damaging or destroying.
6) Misusing the chattel.

Question 32

Conversion: Intent Required.

Mistake?

Bona Fide Purchaser?

Accidental Conduct.

Answer 32

Intent Required
As with trespass to chattels, mistake as to ownership is no defense; the only intent required is the intent to do the act that interferes with the plaintiff’s right of possession.

Even if the conduct is wholly innocent, liability may attach where the interference is serious in nature.

1) Bona Fide Purchaser May Be Liable
Under this principle, even a bona fide purchaser of chattel may become a converter if the chattel had been stolen from the true owner.

2) Accidental Conduct Insufficient
Accidentally causing damage to or loss of another’s chattel does not amount to conversion unless the actor was using the chattel without permission when the accident occurred.
(Note that the actor may be liable in negligence for accidental damage.)

Question 33

Conversion: Seriousness of Interference

Answer 33

The longer the withholding period and the more extensive the use, the more likely it is to be conversion. A less serious interference is trespass to chattels.

Usually, where the interference with possessory rights is insubstantial (e.g., where a person momentarily takes another person’s property or merely moves it for her own convenience), the actor is not viewed as asserting sufficient interference for conversion (although it may suffice for trespass to chattels).
However, such interference with the possessory rights of another in the chattel, if serious enough, may amount to conversion.
Thus, for example, if this person refuses to return the chattel when asked, or alters it, she may be liable for conversion because her action so seriously interferes with another’s chattel rights that it amounts to a claim of dominion and control on the actor’s part.
No specific rule can be stated for these situations; however, the longer the withholding period and the more extensive the use of the chattel during this time, the more likely it is that conversion has resulted.

Question 34

Conversion: Subject Matter of Conversion

Answer 34

Only tangible personal property and intangibles that have been reduced to physical form (for example, a promissory note) are subject to conversion.
And documents in which title to a chattel is merged (e.g., a bill of lading or a warehouse receipt).

Intangibles such as a bakery route, customer lists, or the goodwill of a business may not be the subject of conversion.
Neither may real property be converted.

Question 35

Conversion: Remedies

Answer 35

The plaintiff may recover damages (fair market value at the time of conversion) or possession (replevin).

1) Damages: The plaintiff is entitled to damages for the fair market value of the chattel. This value is generally computed as of the time and place of conversion. The defendant is given title upon satisfaction of the judgment so that, in effect, there is a forced sale of the chattel. Note that even if the defendant wishes to return the item, the plaintiff is not obligated to take it back once it has been converted.

2) Replevin: If the plaintiff wishes to have the chattel returned, he may get it by availing himself of the remedy of replevin.

Question 36

Special Situation of Bailees Receiving Stolen Property

Answer 36

A bailee receiving goods from a thief without notice of the improper taking may return the goods to the thief without liability to the real owner.
However, if the bailee has notice and the real owner makes a demand for his goods, the bailee is liable for conversion if she returns the goods to the thief.

Question 37

Who May Bring Action for Conversion?

Answer 37

Anyone with possession or the immediate right to possession may maintain an action for conversion.
Possession is viewed as sufficient title against a wrongdoer.
However, if the person in possession is not the true owner, she is accountable to the true owner for any recovery to the extent of the owner’s interest.

Question 38

Conversion: Causation

Answer 38

The interference with plaintiff’s chattel interests must have been legally caused by the defendant’s act or something set in motion thereby.

Question 39

Chart: TRESPASS TO CHATTELS VS. CONVERSION

Act by Defendant:

intent:

Remedy:

Answer 39

Trespass to Chattels:
Act by Defendant: An interference with plaintiff’s right of possession of chattel (either intermeddling or dispossession)
Intent: Intent to do the act that brings about the interference
Remedy: Recovery of actual damages from harm to chattel or loss of use

Conversion:
Act by Defendant: An interference with plaintiff’s right of possession so serious as to warrant that defendant pay the chattel’s full value
Intent: Intent to do the act that brings about the interference (SAME)
Remedy: Damage award of fair market value of chattel at time of conversion or possession (replevin)

Question 40

Trespass to Chattels vs Conversion…

Private civil damage remedies for each…

Answer 40

For vandalims or theft.

If the interference is small harm = trespass to chattels
Remedy is just the cost of repair

Big harm = Conversion
Conversion has a special remedy where you get the full FMV of the item. Conversion operates as a FORCED Sale!