Back  ·   Table of Contents  ·   Next

Conversion


[1] Elements and Case Citations

(1) Defendant’s unauthorized act;

(2) Deprives plaintiff of his or her property permanently or for an indefinite time; and

(3) The deprivation is inconsistent with defendant’s ownership interest in the property.

____________________________________

Florida State Courts

First District: Mayo v. Allen, 973 So. 2d 1257, 1258-59 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)

Second District: Shelby Mut. Ins. Co., v. Crain Press Inc., 481 So. 2d 501, 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 491 So. 2d 278 (1986)

Third District: Senfeld v. Bank of Novia Scotia Trust Co., 450 So. 2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)

Fourth District: Warshall v. Price, 629 So. 2d 903, 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), rev. denied, 641 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1994)

Fifth District: Seymour v. Adams, 638 So. 2d 1044, 1046 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)

Florida Federal Courts

Eleventh Circuit: Fogade v. ENB Revocable Trust, 263 F. 3d 1274, 1291 (11th Cir. 2001)

Southern District: Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. v. Dole Food Co., 136 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1294 (S.D. Fla. 2001)

Middle District: Furmanite America, Inc. v. T.D. Williamson, Inc., 506 F. Supp. 2d 1134, 1143 (M.D. Fla. 2007)

Florida Rules

Fla. R. Civ. P. Form 1.939 (complaint for conversion)

[2] Defenses to Claim for Conversion

(1) Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110(d) (pleading affirmative defenses), and other standard defenses. See § 60.

(2) Statute of Limitations: § 95.11(3)(h), Fla. Stat. (four years); see Small Business Admin. v. Echevarria, 864 F. Supp. 1254, 1260 (S.D. Fla. 1994).

(3) Breach of contract or other obligation to pay money does not, without more, give rise to conversion claim. See Misabec Mercantile Inc. de Panama v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette ACLI Futures, Inc., 853 F.2d 834, 837 (11th Cir. 1988).

(4) Plaintiff failed to allege demand, or futility of demand, for return of the property. See Ginsberg v. Lennar Florida Holdings, Inc., 645 So. 2d 490, 500 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), rev. denied, 659 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 1995).

(5) Conversion cannot be based on taking of ``fungible’’ money that is not capable of specific identification. See Florida Dept. Ins. v. Debenture Guaranty, 921 F. Supp. 750, 757 (M.D. Fla. 1996).

(6) Plaintiff does not own, or possess rights to, the property in question. See Page v. Matthews, 386 So. 2d 815, 816 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).

(7) Plaintiff consented to defendant’s possession of the allegedly converted property. See National Bank of Melbourne & Trust Co. v. Batchelor, 266 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972).

Back  ·   Table of Contents  ·   Next

 
© 2004-2008 The Florida Litigation Guide. All rights reserved.  Privacy  Terms of Use  
About The Author About The Guide The Complete Guide Testimonials Legal Research Sites Home Home Wites & Kapetan, P.A. Wites & Kapetan, P.A. Wites & Kapetan, P.A.