Section 2: Trespass & Conversion

Trespass to Land Act

The actor intentionally steps onto a specific piece of land or fails to remove a thing they have a duty to remove

Trespass Intent

The actor only needs the intent to step onto that specific land not an intent to break the law or harm the owner

Knowledge as Intent

Intent is established if the actor knows that the consequences of his act are certain to result such as hunting dogs wandering onto another's land

No Harm Required for Trespass

Liability exists even if the intrusion causes zero physical damage to the property

Accidents vs Trespass

Accidental intrusions where the defendant did not intend the physical movement do not constitute a trespass

Mistake in Trespass

Reasonable mistakes about owning the land or having consent do not excuse liability unless the landowner caused the mistake

Subsurface Rights

A property owner owns the land to the sky and to the depths

Edward v. Lee

Defendant was held liable for trespass because a portion of the cave he used for his hotel crossed underground into the plaintiff's property line

Smith v. New England Aircraft

Flights below FAA thresholds may violate the owner's possible effective possession of the airspace and constitute a trespass

Conditional Consent

If a visitor breaks a condition or limit placed on their entry they lose permission and become a trespasser

Fraudulent Consent

Fraud does not negate consent for property entry but it does negate consent if the plaintiff's right to control their own body is invaded

Desnick v. ABC

Misrepresenting motives to enter a public business is not trespass because there is no exposure of intimate life and public policy favors investigative journalism

Trespass to Chattels

Minor or temporary intentional interference with personal property where the owner suffers actual damage or loss of use

Conversion

Severe interference with personal property that acts as a forced purchase requiring the defendant to pay the full value of the item

Conversion by Destruction

Intentionally destroying a chattel or materially altering its character subjects the actor to conversion liability

Palmer v. Mayo

A sub-user damaged a rented horse during an unauthorized use and was held strictly liable for conversion because deviating from the contract asserted unlawful dominion

Spooner v. Manchester

Defendant rented a horse and got lost but was not liable for conversion because an honest mistake lacks the required intent to assert dominion

Nemo Dat Rule

A thief can transfer no better title than he himself has so a buyer gets only the title their seller possessed

O'Keeffe v. Synder

Stolen paintings were sold to unsuspecting buyers but the original owner won because the thief had no valid title to transfer

Voidable Title

A person who acquires goods through face-to-face trickery has the power to transfer good title to a good-faith purchaser for value

Phelps v. McQuade

Jewelers voluntarily handed goods to an impersonator passing voidable title so the good-faith buyer who later purchased them was allowed to keep them