TROYER (from the French word trourer, find "), the name of an action invented for the purpose of ascertaining the right, as between the plaintiff and defendant, to the personal chattels which are the subject of it. This action is maintainable by one who has either an absolute or special property In the chattels and also a right to posses sion. Thus it may be brought either by the actual owner or an occa sional bailee, a carrier, &c., or a mere finder as against all except the rightful owner. The declaration formerly stated that the plaintiff was Lawfully possessed as of his own property of certain personal chattels, naming them distinctly, their amount and value ; that ho afterwards casually lost them, and that they came into the possession of the de fendant by .finding, who, afterwards converted them to his own use ; for which the plaintiff claimed damages. This form and the fiction respecting the loss and finding Of the goods were contrived for the purpose, by assuming a right of possession in the defendant, of enabling the parties to try the bare question of right. These fictions are not now used; and the fact of conversion, which is the gist of the action, is proved by showing that the defendant upon request refused to deliver up the goods, or has destroyed them, or has assumed the right to dispose of them. When au act of conversion has once been com pleted, no subsequent act by the defendant can, as is Bald, "purge the conversion ;" that is, the right of action, having once vested in the plaintiff by the act of conversion, will not be divested by any subse quent act of the defendant. But such a subsequent act, as for instance
the return of the goods, may reduce the damages to a merely nominal character. The action is not maintainable by one joint tenant, or tenant in common, or partner against another, unless in the case where the chattel has been destroyed by the other. This rule is founded on the principle that the possession of one is, by reason of the joint pro party of all, held to be the possession of all, and therefore no act of conversion can be said to have been committed.
The answers to this action are, a denial of the property of the plain tiff in the chattel ; or the statute of limitations, namely, that six years have elapsed since the act of conversion was committed ; or any cir cumstances showing that the defendant has a right to detain the goods, as from having a lien upon them. &c.
The plaintiff must prove that the nature and value of the goods are as stated in the declaration. If he succeed in obtaining a verdict, the jury may give damages to the amount of the value of the goods, and also such sum in addition as may cover the amount of interest during the time subsequent to the conversion. This action differs from the action of detinno ne being brought to recover damages, while the object of the action of datum° is to recover the actual goods in specie.