Opinion ID: 1766361
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: the agent debit balances

Text: Appellant next contests the jury's findings that it converted the agent debit balance of $62,462. Appellant argues the debit balances were not susceptible to a conversion action because they were mere debts. Conversion does not generally lie for money represented by a debt. Dillard v. Payne, 615 S.W.2d 53, 55 (Mo.1981). Conversion may lie, however, as to funds placed in the custody of another for a specific purpose and their diversion for such other than such specified purpose. Dillard at 55. Respondent's debit balances represented money loaned by respondent to his agents to cover various expenses. There is no evidence here that appellant directed the money towards a purpose different from which it was originally directed. Respondent argues that the debit balances could be converted because they were merged into a tangible document. He claims that the debit balances were notes constituting tangible physical evidence of the intangible debt. There is no evidence in the record of any tangible notes nor is there any evidence appellant converted tangible notes to its own use. This item was improperly submitted.