Virginia Instruction to Jury that Refusal to Deliver Goods after Demand and Tender of Freight and Storage Charges can Constitute Conversion

• Category: Civil Procedure - Jury Instructions - Conversions
• State: Multi-State
• Control #: US-01358BG
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

A trespass to personal property is the 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. One type of Virginia Instruction to Jury that addresses the issue of refusal to deliver goods after demand and tender of freight and storage charges is Instruction No. 16.200, which states: "In a claim for conversion based on refusal to deliver goods after demand and tender of freight and storage charges, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: 1. The plaintiff had a right to possess the goods; 2. The plaintiff demanded delivery of the goods from the defendant; 3. The plaintiff tendered or had the ability to tender the reasonable amount of freight and storage charges owed to the defendant; and 4. The defendant refused to deliver the goods despite the plaintiff's demand and tender of charges. If the plaintiff proves these elements, then you may find that the defendant committed conversion. Conversion occurs when a person intentionally interferes with the right of another to possess personal property, thereby depriving the rightful owner of that property." Another type of Virginia Instruction to Jury that can be used in such cases is Instruction No. 16.201, which applies specifically to situations where the refusal to deliver goods is based on an alleged dispute over the amount of freight and storage charges owed. This instruction clarifies that if the defendant argues that the amount of charges is in dispute, the plaintiff must prove not only the elements mentioned in Instruction No. 16,200 but also: 5. The plaintiff's demand for delivery included a verified statement of the amount of freight and storage charges claimed to be due; and 6. The defendant received the verified statement and had a reasonable opportunity to verify and dispute the amount claimed. These additional elements are essential to establish conversion when the refusal to deliver goods is based on a dispute over the charges owed. Overall, these instructions explain to the jury the necessary elements of a conversion claim based on the defendant's refusal to deliver goods after a demand and tender of freight and storage charges in Virginia. Through these instructions, the court provides guidance for the jury to determine whether the defendant's actions amount to conversion or not.

One type of Virginia Instruction to Jury that addresses the issue of refusal to deliver goods after demand and tender of freight and storage charges is Instruction No. 16.200, which states: "In a claim for conversion based on refusal to deliver goods after demand and tender of freight and storage charges, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: 1. The plaintiff had a right to possess the goods; 2. The plaintiff demanded delivery of the goods from the defendant; 3. The plaintiff tendered or had the ability to tender the reasonable amount of freight and storage charges owed to the defendant; and 4. The defendant refused to deliver the goods despite the plaintiff's demand and tender of charges. If the plaintiff proves these elements, then you may find that the defendant committed conversion. Conversion occurs when a person intentionally interferes with the right of another to possess personal property, thereby depriving the rightful owner of that property." Another type of Virginia Instruction to Jury that can be used in such cases is Instruction No. 16.201, which applies specifically to situations where the refusal to deliver goods is based on an alleged dispute over the amount of freight and storage charges owed. This instruction clarifies that if the defendant argues that the amount of charges is in dispute, the plaintiff must prove not only the elements mentioned in Instruction No. 16,200 but also: 5. The plaintiff's demand for delivery included a verified statement of the amount of freight and storage charges claimed to be due; and 6. The defendant received the verified statement and had a reasonable opportunity to verify and dispute the amount claimed. These additional elements are essential to establish conversion when the refusal to deliver goods is based on a dispute over the charges owed. Overall, these instructions explain to the jury the necessary elements of a conversion claim based on the defendant's refusal to deliver goods after a demand and tender of freight and storage charges in Virginia. Through these instructions, the court provides guidance for the jury to determine whether the defendant's actions amount to conversion or not.