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.
In Virginia, the Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion is a legal concept that plays a crucial role in cases involving allegations of conversion. This instruction serves as a guideline for the jury on how to interpret the evidence related to a defendant's refusal to return possession of property rightfully demanded by the plaintiff. Conversion, in legal terms, refers to the wrongful exercise of control over someone else's property in a manner that deprives the owner of their rights. The instruction in question highlights the significance of a demand for the return of possession and the defendant's subsequent refusal as strong evidence supporting the claim of conversion. By including this instruction, the court instructs the jury to consider the following elements: 1. Demand for Possession: A demand for the return of the property that is unequivocal, clear, and communicated to the defendant or their representative. The demand must establish the plaintiff's ownership and their right to possess the property. 2. Refusal of Possession: The defendant's refusal to comply with the plaintiff's demand, either explicitly or through their conduct, without any lawful justification. The refusal can be an active rejection, an insincere promise, or simply ignoring the demand. The instruction specifies that the jury should view the defendant's refusal of possession as prima facie evidence of conversion. Prima facie evidence indicates that the evidence presented is sufficient to establish a claim or presumption unless rebutted. It is important to note that while the instruction guides the jury's understanding of a refusal of possession being indicative of conversion, it does not automatically determine the outcome of the case. The defendant's counsel may present counterarguments, evidence, or demonstrate lawful justification for the refusal. It is the jury's duty to evaluate the overall evidence and determine the defendant's liability for conversion. Different types of Virginia Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion may include specific variations tailored to different scenarios or specific types of property. For instance, instructions may differ for cases involving personal property, real estate, or intellectual property. These variations ensure that the jury instructions are relevant and specific to the nature of the case being heard. In conclusion, the Virginia Instruction to Jury that Demand for and Refusal of Possession is Prima Facie Evidence of Conversion is a legal guideline that helps the jury evaluate evidence in cases involving allegations of conversion. Understanding the elements and implications of this instruction is crucial for both plaintiffs and defendants in such cases.
