Peters and Lane enter into an oral agreement to create a military museum using military memorabilia that Peters and Lane have gathered over the years. Before this can take place, Peters dies. Peters’ son sues Lane for trespass to personal property and conversion, alleging that Lane came into Peters’ house and took Peters’ memorabilia and commingled his own military memorabilia with that of Peters’ so that it is extremely difficult to separate Peters’ property. If proven, will Peters’ son be more likely to push for conversion or trespass to personal property? (Peters v. Lane, 2005 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4052 (Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist., Div. 3 2005))

  • CreatedSeptember 23, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question