1. What facts, according to Mickens, supported her claim that The Pawn Store had committed conversion?
2. Why did Mickens appeal the trial court’s judgment to the Court of Appeals?
3. Why did the appellate court reject Mickens’s argument and affirm the trial court?

Vogel, P. J.
Consuelo Mickens appeals from the district court’s order following a bench trial denying judgment on her breach of contract and conversion claims against The Pawn Store, Inc. Because we find no error, we affirm the district court.
Mickens and the father of her three children, Jesse Colwell, were regular customers at the Pawn Store (the Store), so much so that the employees were on a first name basis with the couple. Mickens and Colwell held themselves out to be husband and wife to the employees of the Store. Mickens had previously pawned numerous items at the Store, including the diamond ring at question in this case. The Store employees recalled Colwell reclaiming items Mickens had pawned in the past.