<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Conversion Law - MoreLaw.com</title>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com</link>
<description>Conversion Law - MoreLaw.com</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>&#169; Copyright 2008, MoreLaw.com Inc All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
<category>Recent Cases</category>
<item>
<title>Apple, Inc. v. Psystar Corporation</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=C%2008-03251%20WHA&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41987</link>
<description>ORDER RE CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTIn this copyright-infringement action, plaintiff Apple, Inc. and defendant Psystar Corporation have filed cross motions for summary judgment. For the following reasons, Apples motion is GRANTED and Psystars motion is DENIED.STATEMENTPlaintiff Apple Inc. launched its Macintosh computer in 1984 and its Mac OS X operating system in 2001. Apple has manu</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Howard Weiner v. Burr, Pease &amp; Kurtz, P.C.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-13214&amp;s=AK&amp;d=42051</link>
<description>This appeal involves a dispute over the modification of a law firms contingent-fee agreement. The main questions presented are whether the modified contingent-fee agreement is valid and whether the court erred in construing the disputed phrase  further substantial litigation  to mean more than just in-court proceedings and filings. Because the modified fee agreement is valid and the</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Academic Imaging, LLC v. Soterion Corp.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-3577&amp;s=OH&amp;d=42008</link>
<description>Academic Imaging, LLC, and Newark Health Imaging, LLC (NHI), filed suit against Soterion Corp., Soteria Imaging Services, Inc., and other parties, in connection with Academics purchase of Soterions interest in NHI, which Academic and Soterion owned jointly. Academic and NHI brought a number of causes of action in tort and contract, including conversion, violation of Ohio Rev. Code  1</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. v. Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. </title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41889</link>
<description>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. sued Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. on conversion and breach of contract theories claiming that Defendant stole and used trade secrets owned by it. TSMC had previously sued SMIC which agreed to pay $175 million in damages and surrender all TSMC documents and stop using TSMC technology and processes. TSCM accused SMIC for hiring away its emplo</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Randal McCullough  v.  Aegon USA</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-1952&amp;s=IA&amp;d=41921</link>
<description>Randal McCullough, a participant in a defined-benefit pension plan sponsored and administered by AEGON USA, Inc. (AEGON), brought suit under section 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C.  1132(a)(2). He alleged that various plan fiduciaries breached their fiduciary duties to the plan and engaged in prohibited transactions in violation of </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Vartika Dubney v. Public Storage, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=1-09-0094&amp;s=IL&amp;d=41845</link>
<description>Plaintiff Vartika Dubey filed suit against Public Storage, Inc., Metropublic Storage Fund, and PS Illinois Trust (collectively Metropublic or defendant) to recover damages she incurred arising out of the loss of her personal property from a storage unit. Dubey claimed that such loss was the result of an alleged breach of contract, a conversion, and a violation of the Illinois Consumer </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>AAA Valley Gravel, Inc. v. Alicia Totaro and Herman Ramirez</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-12207&amp;s=AK&amp;d=42055</link>
<description>A property owner leased gravel mining rights to a lessee. The lessee in turn leased its rights to a sublessee. The sublessee assumed the lessees duty to pay royalties to the property owner and agreed to pay overriding royalties to the lessee. The lessee later assigned the overriding royalties to an assignee. After more than a decade of operating under these arrangements, the sublessee purchased</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Moore Equipment Company v. Callen Construction Co., Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=WD70011&amp;s=MO&amp;d=41828</link>
<description>Moore Equipment Company appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Callen Construction Co., Inc., on Callen's claim for conversion. Moore contends that Callen's claim fails as a matter of law because it seeks the return of money and does not fall within the limited circumstances in which a claim for the return of money lies in conversion.Moore also alleges that the circuit</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Jerry Christian v. David Mason</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=2009%20Opinion%20No.%20130&amp;s=ID&amp;d=41739</link>
<description>This is an appeal from the dismissal of Jerry and Joy Christians action to set aside an allegedly fraudulent transfer. The district court dismissed the action, finding that the Christians lacked standing because their claim was preempted by federal bankruptcy law. We vacate and remand.I.Factual and Procedural SummaryJerry and Joy Christian were victims of a Ponzi scheme operated by Robert Mc</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Nanodetex Corporation v. Defiant Technologies</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-2123&amp;s=NM&amp;d=41747</link>
<description>Defiant claims that Nanodetex maliciously abused legal process by filing a meritless lawsuit against it that was really aimed at tying up Defiant in litigation so that it could not pursue its business plan and would be forced to merge its business into Nanodetexs. At trial, the jury agreed and awarded Defiant $2,000,001 in damages. Nanodetex now appeals this result. In this diversity disp</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Janell S. Marin v. IESI TX Corporation</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=01-08-00539-CV&amp;s=TX&amp;d=41673</link>
<description> Appellant, Janell S. Marin appeals from a judgment in favor of appellee, IESI TX Corporation ("IESI"). The judgment was rendered in accordance with the jury's findings that Marin committed forgery, misapplication of fiduciary property, fraud, and conversion. In nine issues, Marin challenges the trial court's admission of evidence, the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence, and the award o</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>David D. Beal, et al. v. David A. McGuire, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-12626&amp;s=AK&amp;d=41606</link>
<description>Six members of a joint venture sued two other members, primarily claiming breaches of fiduciary duties. The joint venture, most of whose members were Anchorage physicians, owned a medical services condominium on Laurel Street and leased it out for use as an ambulatory surgical center. The plaintiffs claimed in part that the joint venturer defendants and others were liable for moving the surgical c</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 8 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Sheila T. Harper v. Lawrence County, Alabama</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=09-10226&amp;s=AL&amp;d=41756</link>
<description>This appeal requires us to determine whether the district court properly rescinded its order converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. We must also determine whether the court properly denied Defendants qualified immunity. After reviewing the record and the parties briefs, we AFFIRM IN PART AND REVERSE IN PART.I. FACTSA. BackgroundThe following facts are taken from Plai</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 7 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>All-Ways Logistics  v.  USA Truck</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-1054&amp;s=AR&amp;d=41559</link>
<description>This breach-of-contract case arises out of a commission agreement entered into by All-Ways Logistics, Inc., and USA Truck, Inc. Following a jury trial, the District Court1 awarded All-Ways approximately $3 million on its breach-of-contract claims, as well as prejudgment interest and attorney fees. USA Truck appeals, arguing that the District Court erred by (1) failing to instruct the jury on an af</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Ahmed M. Ali v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=No.%201313%20September%20Term,%202008&amp;s=MD&amp;d=41657</link>
<description>This appeal is from a judgment entered by the Circuit Court for Prince Georges County against Ahmed M. Ali, appellant, and in favor of CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc., appellee, in the amount of $190,725.85 in damages and $21,977.95 in prejudgment interest. Appellant contends that the trial court should have dismissed the suit because it was barred by the applicable statute of limitatio</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 5 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Carts &amp; Parts, Inc. v. Antonio L. Rosales</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=2009%20OK%20CIV%20APP%2074&amp;s=OK&amp;d=41990</link>
<description>1 Defendant/Appellant, Antonio L. Rosales, seeks review of the trial court's order in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee, Carts &amp; Parts, Inc. (Carts &amp; Parts), enjoining and prohibiting Appellant from using, selling and disposing of his real and personal property, of whatever kind and nature, including death proceeds from several life insurance policies insuring Appellant's wife, Kyrle W. Rosales. We re</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 1 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>David K. Stone v. Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-08-0267&amp;s=WY&amp;d=41477</link>
<description>[1] David K. Stone and Nicholas B. Loundagin assigned their operating rights under a state oil and gas lease to Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. (Devon) and Carpenter &amp; Sons, Inc. (Carpenter). When Devon and Carpenter did not offer to reassign the operating rights to them six months before the lease expiration date, Mr. Stone and Mr. Loundagin filed an action against them for breach of cont</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 1 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Faegre &amp; Benson, LLP v. R &amp; R Investors, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=A08-1899&amp;s=MN&amp;d=41579</link>
<description>This is an appeal from summary judgment in an interpleader action in which the district court determined that respondent partnership was entitled to the proceeds from the settlement of a lawsuit against the federal government, and dismissed appellants damages claims against respondent law firms, who were litigation counsel in the federal lawsuit and commenced this interpleader action to resolve</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Alonzo Mansfield, Jr. v. A &amp; M Automotive</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=(AC%2029834&amp;s=CT&amp;d=41463</link>
<description>The plaintiff, Alonzo Mansfield, Jr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendant, A &amp; M Automotive. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) concluded that the defendant did not violate General Statutes  14-145a, (2) failed to find that the defendant was liable for conversion and (3) failed to find that the defendants actions constituted a violat</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Selepro, Inc. v. John Church, J Co Solutions, Inc., et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=4D08-2256&amp;s=FL&amp;d=41412</link>
<description>A plaintiff corporation appeals an adverse summary judgment in favor of two of three defendants. The main issue raised is whether a dissolved foreign corporation can continue to maintain an action in Florida as part of winding up its business. We find the answer is statutorily controlled and the answer is yes. We therefore reverse and remand the case for further proceedings.The plaintiff i</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>John Delois v. Barrett Block Partners, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=A121665&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41380</link>
<description>In 2006, a dispute arose between plaintiff Delois, then a tenant of defendants in a live/work space on Harrison Street in San Francisco, and defendants. The dispute, described in more detail below, was purportedly resolved by a written agreement between the parties. But various and sundry factors led to alleged breaches of that agreement; in any event, plaintiff did not vacate the premises o</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Claude LeFoumba v. Legend Classic Homes, Ltd. and Legend Home Corp.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=14-08-00243-CV&amp;s=TX&amp;d=41349</link>
<description>Appellant, Claude LeFoumba, prevailed in arbitration against the appellees, Legend Classic Homes, Ltd. and Legend Home Corp. (collectively, ALegend@).  Legend successfully challenged LeFoumba=s failure to segregate his attorney=s fees, resulting in a modified arbitration award that reduced his recovery by only $190.00.  Nevertheless, LeFoumba brought this appeal to challenge the trial court=s conf</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>William K. Dietz v. Meisenheimer &amp; Herron, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=D052463&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41340</link>
<description>In January 2004, Attorney William K. Dietz filed this action against Meisenheimer &amp; Herron and Meisenheimer, Herron &amp; Steele (Meisenheimer). In his complaint, Dietz alleged that he referred a bad faith insurance litigation matter involving Vital Services Company Inc. (Vital) to Meisenheimer. Dietz further alleged that Meisenheimer breached an agreement between Meisenheimer and Dietz to pay Dietz 2</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Sherry S. Albert v. J. Kimzie Cowart</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=COA09-93&amp;s=NC&amp;d=41814</link>
<description>Defendants Kimzie Cowart and Wachovia Corporation (Wachovia) appeal from Henderson County Superior Court judgments entered 31 July 2008 and 2 September 2008. For the reasons stated herein, we reverse in part the judgment of the trial court and dismiss in part the appeal.FactsFrank and Doris King were residents of Henderson County, North Carolina. At the age of 75, Doris was diagnosed with term</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Farmers Union Association, Big Horn County, Montana v, Gerald Paquin, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=2009%20MT%20305&amp;s=MT&amp;d=41613</link>
<description>1 The Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, granted defendant Ronald Nedens motion to change venue for this action from Yellowstone County to Big Horn County. Plaintiff Farmers Union Association (FUA) appeals. We reverse and remand.2 The sole issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in changing venue.BACKGROUND3 According to FUAs 92-paragraph complain</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel></rss>

