Focal Point, Inc. v. U-Haul Co. of Arizona, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• acknowledging that Arizona has adopted the definition of conversion contained in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 222.A.1 (1965)
• finding no conversion when the plaintiff could have regained control by traveling a short distance to prove right of possession to a truck
• defining conversion as “an intentional exercise of dominion or control over a 10 chattel which so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor 11 may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the chattel”
• “Good faith belief or intention is 27 no defense to a conversion action in Arizona”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).