Law

Mrs. Smith had borrowed a barbecue and a CD player from Mrs. Jones. After the get-together, instead of returning them, she decided to exchange the CD player with a friend for a computer monitor and refused to return the barbecue although Mrs. Jones had requested her to do so.

Clearly, this is a case under bailment. Bailment exists whenever possession of goods is transferred from one party (the bailor) to another (the bailee) on the understanding that the goods will be returned to the bailor or disposed off if directed by the bailor upon completion of purpose for which they are being borrowed . Since the bailor is not transferring ownership, the bailee has the duty to take reasonable care of the goods and to return them in an acceptable physical condition.

Under Mrs. Smith’s situation, she intentionally exchanged Ms. Jones’s CD player for a computer monitor through a third party. Because her act is intentional, and under no direction from the owner, the action of bailment is terminated, and she will be responsible for the tort of conversion for unjustified failure to redeliver the property . Conversion is a tort that deals with the wrongful interference with goods. For example stealing, moving, hiding or destroying somebody else’s property .

Mrs. Jones has the right to sue Mrs. Smith for her intention to exchange the goods with a third party. Damages are the usual remedy for conversion. The amount of damages that will be rewarded is assessed on the value of the goods, and upon payment, ownership of the goods passes to the defendant, Mrs. Smith . This means that Mrs. Jones has a right to claim only the value of the goods. However, the converter can return possession of the goods to the plaintiff, but this can only be accepted in lieu of damages if the plaintiff agrees. If the plaintiff wants the goods returned without any additional monetary damages, they can claim a related tort, detinue.

Secondly, the fact that