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.
Fairfax Virginia is a county located in the northern part of the Commonwealth of Virginia in the United States. It is part of the Washington Metropolitan Area and has a rich history dating back to the early colonial era. The county is known for its robust economy, thriving cultural scene, diverse communities, and excellent educational institutions. One important legal concept that often comes into play in Fairfax Virginia is the instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion. This instruction is relevant in cases involving conversion, which is a civil wrong that occurs when someone unlawfully takes or uses another person's property without permission. The refusal of the possessor to return the property upon demand serves as evidence of their wrongful act. There are variations of the Fairfax Virginia instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion. Here are some examples: 1. Standard Instruction: This instruction provides a general explanation of the concept and informs the jury that if the plaintiff demands the return of their property and the defendant refuses to comply, it can be considered as evidence of conversion. 2. Qualified Instruction: This instruction outlines additional factors the jury should consider when determining conversion. It may state that while refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion, the jury must also assess other circumstances of the case, such as the defendant's intent or any potential legal rights to possess the property. 3. Burden of Proof Instruction: This variation emphasizes that the plaintiff has the initial burden of proving that they made a demand for the return of the property and that the defendant refused to comply. Once this is established, the burden shifts to the defendant to rebut the presumption of conversion. In summary, Fairfax Virginia is a county with a diverse and thriving community. In legal cases involving conversion, the instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion is an important aspect. Variations of this instruction may exist to address specific circumstances of the case.Fairfax Virginia is a county located in the northern part of the Commonwealth of Virginia in the United States. It is part of the Washington Metropolitan Area and has a rich history dating back to the early colonial era. The county is known for its robust economy, thriving cultural scene, diverse communities, and excellent educational institutions. One important legal concept that often comes into play in Fairfax Virginia is the instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion. This instruction is relevant in cases involving conversion, which is a civil wrong that occurs when someone unlawfully takes or uses another person's property without permission. The refusal of the possessor to return the property upon demand serves as evidence of their wrongful act. There are variations of the Fairfax Virginia instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion. Here are some examples: 1. Standard Instruction: This instruction provides a general explanation of the concept and informs the jury that if the plaintiff demands the return of their property and the defendant refuses to comply, it can be considered as evidence of conversion. 2. Qualified Instruction: This instruction outlines additional factors the jury should consider when determining conversion. It may state that while refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion, the jury must also assess other circumstances of the case, such as the defendant's intent or any potential legal rights to possess the property. 3. Burden of Proof Instruction: This variation emphasizes that the plaintiff has the initial burden of proving that they made a demand for the return of the property and that the defendant refused to comply. Once this is established, the burden shifts to the defendant to rebut the presumption of conversion. In summary, Fairfax Virginia is a county with a diverse and thriving community. In legal cases involving conversion, the instruction to the jury that demand for and refusal of possession is prima facie evidence of conversion is an important aspect. Variations of this instruction may exist to address specific circumstances of the case.
