A trespass to personal property is t he use of someone's property without person. A conversion occurs when personal property is taken by a defendant and kept from its true owner without permission of the owner. Conversion is the civil side of the crime of theft. Demand and refusal are necessary for the maintenance of an action for conversion in all cases in which defendant was rightfully in possession.
Title: Understanding North Dakota Instruction to Jury: Demand for and Refusal of Possession as Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion Introduction: In the legal landscape of North Dakota, the instruction to a jury regarding demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion holds crucial significance. Conversion refers to the act of unlawfully exercising control over someone else's property, denying the owner's rights. This article aims to provide an in-depth description of this important instruction, including its application and possible variations. 1. Key Concept: Demand for and Refusal of Possession: Demand for and refusal of possession is a legal concept that arises in cases involving conversion claims. It refers to situations where the rightful owner of a property or asset demands its return from the alleged converter, who, in turn, denies or refuses to return the property. 2. The Role of Instruction to the Jury: In North Dakota, a jury receives legal instructions before deliberating on a case. One such instruction pertains to the demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion. The purpose of including this instruction is to guide the jury in understanding the legal significance of the demand and refusal in determining the defendant's liability for conversion. 3. Prima Facie Evidence: The term "prima facie" refers to evidence that, on its face, establishes a rebut table presumption in favor of a specific fact or claim. Therefore, when demand for and refusal of possession occurs, it is considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. This means that unless the defendant can provide a valid defense, the law presumes the conversion has taken place based on this evidence alone. 4. Application of the Instruction: When this instruction is provided to the jury, they are instructed to consider the elements of demand for possession, refusal of possession, and the timing and circumstances of these actions. The purpose is to evaluate whether the evidence supports the claim of conversion. If the jury determines that the demand occurred, the defendant refused possession, and such actions were wrongful, it strengthens the plaintiff's case. 5. Variations and Application by Case Types: While there may not be different forms of the North Dakota instruction itself, the concept of demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion can apply in various case types. Some examples include conversion of personal property, conversion of real estate, conversion of funds, conversion of intellectual property, or any other scenario where the possession of another's property is being contested. Conclusion: In North Dakota, the instruction to a jury regarding demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion plays a significant role in determining the outcome of conversion cases. Incorporating this instruction helps guide the jury in analyzing the evidence and understanding the legal implications surrounding this crucial aspect. By evaluating the demand and refusal in light of the circumstances, the law ensures fairness and justice in resolving conversion claims.Title: Understanding North Dakota Instruction to Jury: Demand for and Refusal of Possession as Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion Introduction: In the legal landscape of North Dakota, the instruction to a jury regarding demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion holds crucial significance. Conversion refers to the act of unlawfully exercising control over someone else's property, denying the owner's rights. This article aims to provide an in-depth description of this important instruction, including its application and possible variations. 1. Key Concept: Demand for and Refusal of Possession: Demand for and refusal of possession is a legal concept that arises in cases involving conversion claims. It refers to situations where the rightful owner of a property or asset demands its return from the alleged converter, who, in turn, denies or refuses to return the property. 2. The Role of Instruction to the Jury: In North Dakota, a jury receives legal instructions before deliberating on a case. One such instruction pertains to the demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion. The purpose of including this instruction is to guide the jury in understanding the legal significance of the demand and refusal in determining the defendant's liability for conversion. 3. Prima Facie Evidence: The term "prima facie" refers to evidence that, on its face, establishes a rebut table presumption in favor of a specific fact or claim. Therefore, when demand for and refusal of possession occurs, it is considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. This means that unless the defendant can provide a valid defense, the law presumes the conversion has taken place based on this evidence alone. 4. Application of the Instruction: When this instruction is provided to the jury, they are instructed to consider the elements of demand for possession, refusal of possession, and the timing and circumstances of these actions. The purpose is to evaluate whether the evidence supports the claim of conversion. If the jury determines that the demand occurred, the defendant refused possession, and such actions were wrongful, it strengthens the plaintiff's case. 5. Variations and Application by Case Types: While there may not be different forms of the North Dakota instruction itself, the concept of demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion can apply in various case types. Some examples include conversion of personal property, conversion of real estate, conversion of funds, conversion of intellectual property, or any other scenario where the possession of another's property is being contested. Conclusion: In North Dakota, the instruction to a jury regarding demand for and refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion plays a significant role in determining the outcome of conversion cases. Incorporating this instruction helps guide the jury in analyzing the evidence and understanding the legal implications surrounding this crucial aspect. By evaluating the demand and refusal in light of the circumstances, the law ensures fairness and justice in resolving conversion claims.
