The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Distinguishing conversion vs trespass to chattels
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:06 PM Author: Black bearded athletic conference indirect expression I seem to keep missing these on the Barbri q's when the property is damaged but not destroyed. Any good rule of thumb to tell the difference? Some percentage of damage that equals a conversion? Thanks. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328791) |
 |
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:07 PM Author: Dull fear-inspiring school cafeteria jap I think it has to be damaged near the point of being worthless. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328801) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:08 PM Author: Black bearded athletic conference indirect expression I thought so too, but Barbri has had some where 30% of property value to repair, and they call it conversion. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328810) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:15 PM Author: contagious lake knife international law enforcement agency yeah, and that Q where the person drove it for 3000 miles and it was conversion was bullshit too i suspect (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328894) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 10:05 PM Author: orange excitant legend FUCK that q, nfw the barbri answer was right. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12329424) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 10:11 PM Author: Black bearded athletic conference indirect expression I have had that same impression re Barbri's answers on some other more subjective areas of law. Mainly shit like whether there was state action, whether X would forsee Y, etc. There are also a few evidence questions where I'm sure you could get a statement in under motive, notice, etc--but barbri just calls it hearsay not subject to exception. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12329514) |
|
Date: July 24th, 2009 12:53 AM Author: Frisky roast beef Yeah I thought that was bullshit too. That messed with my entire fucking understanding of the concept. Car was returned fine, with 300 miles on it. Conversion? Fuck that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12331843) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:08 PM Author: Smoky bawdyhouse old irish cottage Stolen=Conversion. Unusable=Conversion. It has to be so fucked up that no amount of repair makes it usable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328811) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:10 PM Author: Black bearded athletic conference indirect expression So I should just disregard the barbri explanations? I kid you not, they have a question called some $1K laptop with $400 in damage conversion.
I am praying that on the real test they'll be like 80% loss in value b/c of damage. |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:12 PM Author: Odious demanding business firm No. that poster is incorrect. The laptop example is right.
Just think about it dude. You can pay $400 to fix my laptop, but I sure as fuck don't want it back = Conversion. |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:13 PM Author: Black bearded athletic conference indirect expression Thanks, dood. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328874) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:12 PM Author: Odious demanding business firm "Stolen=Conversion. Unusable=Conversion."
Correct.
"It has to be so fucked up that no amount of repair makes it usable."
Overstatement |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:14 PM Author: Cordovan heady black woman Correct. i did a sewing machine problem with $400 in damage and it was worth $1k. BarBri called it conversion. I was using a 50% rule in my mind until that tripped me up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328881) |
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:09 PM Author: Odious demanding business firm Ask yourself: would I want that shit back, even if they offer to pay most of the value to "fix" it?
If the answer is no: conversion - give me FMV, biotch. If the answer is yes: trespass - pay to fix it, biotch. |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:19 PM Author: Odious demanding business firm Per PMBR:
"Difference between trespass to chattels and conversion is one of degree. The seriousness of the interference determines which tort to apply. Conversional is an intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel which SERIOUSLY INTERFERES with the right of another to control it." |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2009 9:22 PM Author: Narrow-minded native stain I found PMBR's illustrations (examples) very helpful re: conversion/trespass to chattel (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1048709&forum_id=2#12328946) |