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.
New Mexico Instruction to Jury — Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion In New Mexico, when a case involves allegations of conversion, the court may provide a specific instruction to the jury regarding the significance of the demand for and refusal of possession. This instruction serves to guide the jury in assessing whether a defendant's refusal to return property, after a proper demand has been made by the rightful owner, can be considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. Conversion is a legal term that refers to the act of wrongfully exercising ownership or control over someone else's property, denying the rightful owner of their possessor rights. It is essential for a plaintiff to establish that the defendant intentionally or negligently converted their property, thus causing harm or loss. When the court instructs the jury that the demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion, it means that the refusal to return the property upon demand raises a presumption of guilt or liability. However, this presumption can be rebutted by the defendant presenting evidence or arguments that justify their actions or challenge the validity of the claim. Different types of New Mexico Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prime Facial Evidence of Conversion include: 1. Standard Prima Facie Instruction: This instruction educates the jury about the general concept of prima facie evidence of conversion, highlighting that a refusal to return the property after a rightful demand can serve as evidence against the defendant. The instruction will also emphasize that the presence of prima facie evidence does not automatically guarantee the defendant's guilt, but rather, it establishes a presumption that can be challenged. 2. Elements of Prima Facie Evidence: This instruction breaks down the elements required for the demand for and refusal of possession to be considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. It may specify that the demand must be valid and reasonable, and the refusal must be explicit or implicitly shown through actions. By clearly outlining the essential components, the instruction helps the jury to evaluate whether the evidence presented meets the threshold of prima facie evidence. 3. Burden of Proof — Rebutting Prima Facie Evidence: This instruction focuses on the defendant's burden to rebut the presumption of conversion arising from the demand for and refusal of possession. It explains that the defendant has the opportunity to provide evidence or arguments challenging the validity of the demand or presenting alternative justifications for their actions. The jury is then instructed to weigh the evidence presented by both sides and determine whether the defendant successfully rebuts the prima facie evidence. In conclusion, New Mexico Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion helps guide the jury in determining whether the defendant's refusal to return property, after a proper demand has been made, can be considered as evidence of conversion. It emphasizes the presumption of guilt arising from such refusal, the elements required for prima facie evidence, and the defendant's opportunity to rebut the presumption through evidence or arguments.New Mexico Instruction to Jury — Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion In New Mexico, when a case involves allegations of conversion, the court may provide a specific instruction to the jury regarding the significance of the demand for and refusal of possession. This instruction serves to guide the jury in assessing whether a defendant's refusal to return property, after a proper demand has been made by the rightful owner, can be considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. Conversion is a legal term that refers to the act of wrongfully exercising ownership or control over someone else's property, denying the rightful owner of their possessor rights. It is essential for a plaintiff to establish that the defendant intentionally or negligently converted their property, thus causing harm or loss. When the court instructs the jury that the demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion, it means that the refusal to return the property upon demand raises a presumption of guilt or liability. However, this presumption can be rebutted by the defendant presenting evidence or arguments that justify their actions or challenge the validity of the claim. Different types of New Mexico Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prime Facial Evidence of Conversion include: 1. Standard Prima Facie Instruction: This instruction educates the jury about the general concept of prima facie evidence of conversion, highlighting that a refusal to return the property after a rightful demand can serve as evidence against the defendant. The instruction will also emphasize that the presence of prima facie evidence does not automatically guarantee the defendant's guilt, but rather, it establishes a presumption that can be challenged. 2. Elements of Prima Facie Evidence: This instruction breaks down the elements required for the demand for and refusal of possession to be considered as prima facie evidence of conversion. It may specify that the demand must be valid and reasonable, and the refusal must be explicit or implicitly shown through actions. By clearly outlining the essential components, the instruction helps the jury to evaluate whether the evidence presented meets the threshold of prima facie evidence. 3. Burden of Proof — Rebutting Prima Facie Evidence: This instruction focuses on the defendant's burden to rebut the presumption of conversion arising from the demand for and refusal of possession. It explains that the defendant has the opportunity to provide evidence or arguments challenging the validity of the demand or presenting alternative justifications for their actions. The jury is then instructed to weigh the evidence presented by both sides and determine whether the defendant successfully rebuts the prima facie evidence. In conclusion, New Mexico Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion helps guide the jury in determining whether the defendant's refusal to return property, after a proper demand has been made, can be considered as evidence of conversion. It emphasizes the presumption of guilt arising from such refusal, the elements required for prima facie evidence, and the defendant's opportunity to rebut the presumption through evidence or arguments.
