TROVER (Fr. trouver, to find). In Prac tice. A form of action .which lies to recover 'damages against one who has, without right, _converted to his own use goods or personal chattels in which the plaintiff has a general or special property.
A generic name, applied to those torts, arising from the unlawful conversion of any particular piece of personal property owned by another. Spellman v. R. Co., 35 S. C. 475, 14 S. E. 947, 28 Am. St. Rep. 858.
In form it is a fiction.: in substance, a rem edy to recover the value of personal chat tels wrongfully converted by another to his own use. 1 Burr. 31.
The action was originally an action of trespass on the case where goods were found by the defendant and retained against the plaintiff's rightful claim. The manner of gaining possession soon came to be disregarded, as the substantial part of the action is the conversion to the defendant's use; so 'that the action lies whether the goods came into the defend ant's possession by finding or otherwise, if he fails to deliver them upon the rightful claim of the plaintiff. It differs from detinue and replevin lo this, that It is brought for damages and not for the specific articles; and from trespass In this, that the injury is not necessarily a forcible one, as tro ver may be brought in any case where trespass for injury to personai property will lie ; but the eon verse is not true. In case possession was gained by a trespass, the plaintiff by bringing his action in this form waives his right to damages for the tak-* ing, and is confined to the injury resulting from the conversion ; Greenfield Bank v. Leavitt, 17 Pick. (Mass.) 1, 28 Am. Dec. 268; McNear v. Atwood, 17 Me. 434.
The action lies for one who has a general or absolute property ; Bull. N. P: 33; Pope v. Tucker, 23' Ga. 484; together with a right to immediate possession ; 1 Ry. & M. 99; Clark v. Draper, 19 N. II. 419; Stewart v. Bright, 6 Houst. (Del.) 344; see Owens v. Weedman, 82 Ill. 409 ; Landon v. Emmons, 97 Mass. 37; as, for example, a vendor of property sold upon condition not fulfilled' Houston v. Dyche, 1 Meigs (Tenn.) .76, 33' Am. Dec. 130; or a special property, includ ing actual possession as against a stranger'; 2 Saund. 47; 'Eaton v. Lynde, 15 Mass. 242; Coffin v. Anderson, 4 Blackf. (Ind.) 395; as, for example,. a sheriff holding under rightful process; Blackley v. Sheldon, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 32 ; a in possession ; Reynolds v. Shuler, 5 Cow. (N. Y.) 323 ; a simple bailee; see Hopper v: Miller, 76 N. C. 402; Brown v. DempseY, 95 Pa. 243; Clark v. Bell, 61 Ga. 147; or even a finder merely ; McLaughlin v. Waite, 9 Cow. (N. Y.) 670; and including lawful custody and a right of detention as against the general owner of the goods or chattels ; Spoor T. Holland, 8 Wend. (N. Y.) 445, 24 Am. Dec. 37; M'Connell v. Maxwell, 3 Blackf. (Ind.) 419, 26 Am. Dec. 428. An ex ecutor or administrator is held an absolute owner by relation from the death of the dece dent. And he may maintain an action for a conversion in the lifetime of the dece dent; Towle v. Lovet, .6 Mass. 394; and is liable for a conversion by the decedent; Avery'v. Moore, 1 N. C. 362, 1 Am. Dec. 560.
Trustees having title to chattels with an immediate right of possession may sue in trover for the chattels, although they may never have taken actual possession, but have allowed the goods to remain in the occupa tion of their cestui que trust; (1891] 2 Ch.
172. , The property affected must be some per sonal chattel; Mather v. Ministers of Trinity Church, 3 S. & R. (Pa.) 513, 8 Am. Dee. 663; specifically set oft as the 'plaintiff's ; 4 B. & C. 948 ; Chapman v. Searle, 3 Pick. (Mass.) 38 ; including title deeds; Weiser v. Zeising er, 2 Yeates (Pa.) 537; a copy of a record.; Sawyer v. Baldwin, 11 Pick. (Mass.) 492 ; money, though not tied up; Donohue v. Hen ry, 4 E. D. Smith (N. Y.) 162 ; negotiable se curities; 3 B. & C. 45 ; Todd v. Crookshanks, 3 Johns. (N. Y.) 432 ; -Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Cochrane, 27 Ala. 228; animals feria naturce, but reclaimed ; Amory v. Flyn, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 102, 6 Am. Dec. 316; trees and crops severed from the inheritance ; Davis v. Barnes, 3 Mo. 137 ; James v. Snelson, 3 Mo. 393; Nelson v. Burt, 15 Mass. 204; Sampson v. Hammond, 4 Cal. 184. It will lie by a surviving partner to recover possession of the firm assets as against the representatives of the deceased partners ; Hawkins v. Cap ron, 17 R. I. 679, 24 Atl. 466. It will not lie for property in custody of the law ; Jenner v. Joliffe, 9 Johns. (N. Y.) 381; if rightfully held; see Kennedy's Heirs v. Kennedy's Heirs, 2 Ala. 576; or to which the title must be determined by a court of peculiar juris diction only ; 1 Cam. & N., 115; .or where the bailee has lost the property, or had it stolen, or it has been destroyed by want of due care ; Simmons v. Sikes, 24 N. C. 98. Unless an actual conversion by bailee be shown, an action of trover against him will not lie without a previous demand for the goods; Loveless v. Fowler, 79 Ga. 134, 4 S. E. 103, 11 Am. St. Rep. 407. See CONVERSION.
There must have been a conversion of the property by the defendant ; Stone v. Wag goner, 8 Ark. 204. And a waiver of such conversion will defeat the action; Hewes v. Parkman, 20 Pick. (Mass.) 90. Nondelivery of goods by a vessel is not a conversion of the goods; 35 U. S. App. 369. See CONVER f3ION.
The declaration must state a rightful pos session of the goods by the plaintiff ; Seivier v. Holliday, Hempst. 160, Fed. Cas. No. 12, 680a ; but need not show the nature or dente of plaintiff's title; Warren v. Dwyer, 91 Mich. 414, 51 N. W. 1062 ; it must describe the goods with convenient certainty, though not so accurately as in detinue ; Bull. N. P. 32; Hall v. Burgess, 5 Gray (Mass.) 12 ; must formally allege a finding by the defendant, and must aver a conversion ; Decker v. Math ews, 12 N. Y. 313. It is not indispensable to state the price or value of the thing convert ed; Pearpoint v. Henry, 2 Wash. (Va.) 192; and where there is an actual conversion of property, demand before action is not neces sary ; Baker v. Lothrop, 155 Mass. 376, 29 N. E. 643 ; Knipper v. Blumenthal, 107 Mo. 665, 18 S. W. 23.
The plea of not guilty raises the general issue.
Judgment, when for the plaintiff, is that he recover his damages and costs, or, in some states, in the alternative, that the de fendant restore the goods or pay, etc.; Mitch ell v. Printup, 19 Ga. 579; when for the de fendant, that he recover his costs. The meas ure of damages is the value of the property at the time of the conversion, with interest; Jenkins v. McConico, 26 Ala. 213; Poili's Adm'r v. Allen, 19 Mo. 467; Forbes v. R. Co., 133 Mass. 158.
See the History of Troyer by James Barr Ames, 3 Sel. Essays in Anglo-Amer. L. H. 417.