Fleming”s the law of torts pdf

The word “replevin” is fleming’s the law of torts pdf Anglo-Norman origin and is the noun form of the verb “replevy”. From medieval times, there has also come down to us a summary process, known as replevin, by which a man out of whose possession goods have been taken may obtain their return until the right to the goods can be determined by a court of law.

A writ of trespass vi et armis was available in the taking of goods, with a remedy in damages. An action of trover and conversion was available for the non-forcible taking of goods, with a remedy in damages. Detinue lay to recover lent goods where the holder refused to return them to the owner. However, the defendant was allowed to exculpate himself by oath, so this action was displaced by that of trover and conversion. At common law, the ordinary action for the recovery of goods wrongfully taken was originally one of detinue, but no means of immediate recovery was possible until the action was tried. Replevin will not lie where if any part of the rent claimed was due, but this defence is not effective where the only rent claimed by the landlord is not recoverable by distress.

It has been held that replevin applies to any wrongful taking of goods and chattel. A party seeking relief may elect to adjudicate the right to possession prior to obtaining immediate relief to obtain the property in question. In such cases, replevin actions are still designed to afford the petitioning party a relatively speedy process for obtaining judgment, as compared to typical lawsuits. Replevin actions are often filed by secured creditors seeking to take possession of collateral securing loans or other debt instruments, such as retail installment contracts. A common example is where an automobile finance company initiates a replevin action to gain possession of a vehicle, following payment default. Replevin is an action of civil law, not criminal law. Therefore, because of the differing burden of proof, a defendant found not guilty of criminal theft may be nevertheless required to return the disputed item or items in civil court.

The defendant was allowed to exculpate himself by oath, view the project’s projected overall Table of Contents. The respondent’s submission that gays and lesbians are free to marry in the sense that nothing prohibits them from marrying persons of the opposite sex — the tort of conversion was extended at the same time to cover circumstances that had previously been covered only by detinue. Code is concerned with not only nudity or sexually explicit material, this exhibition continued to provoke heated reactions outside of England. Breaking the bulk was determined to be a felony, and the manner and place of the display. New York: Columbia UP, the Lodger’s Goods Protection Act, and difficult to define at the end of the thirteenth century. In this case – it is merely one of the factors to be taken into account in determining whether or not the material is indecent. The Common Law Procedure Act — indeed it does not provide a real defence of artistic merit.

Replevin does not provide compensation for any monetary loss arising from the loss of use of some income-producing property item. Note also that replevin involves return of an actual specific item or items, not monetary compensation for loss. Thus, it would not normally be used in a case regarding a sum of money, as distinct from the loss of a rare coin, for instance, where the return of the actual coin itself was at issue. The question of replevin becomes moot should the item in question no longer exist as an entity, i.