Opinion ID: 2514493
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Conversion is a common law cause of action available to plaintiffs whose vehicles are unlawfully impounded

Text: ¶ 15 A cause of action in conversion is deeply ingrained in this state's jurisprudence, having been recognized since territorial times. See, e.g., United States v. Kelley, 3 Wash. Terr. 421, 429, 17 P. 878 (1888); Lyen v. Bond, 3 Wash. Terr. 407, 410, 19 P. 35 (1888); Dawson v. Baum, 3 Wash. Terr. 464, 472, 19 P. 46 (1888). Conversion is a derivative of the common law action of trover, which redressed an interference with one's interest in a chattel that was substantial enough to justify compelling the wrongdoer to pay for it as in a forced sale. Iglesias v. United States, 848 F.2d 362, 364 (2d Cir.1988). Under our modern jurisprudence, `[c]onversion is the unjustified, willful interference with a chattel which deprives a person entitled to the property of possession.' In re Marriage of Langham & Kolde, 153 Wash.2d 553, 564, 106 P.3d 212 (2005) (quoting Meyers Way Dev. Ltd. P'ship v. Univ. Sav. Bank, 80 Wash.App. 655, 674-75, 910 P.2d 1308 (1996)). Absent willful misconduct, the measure of damages for conversion is the fair market value of the property at the time and place of conversion. Merchant v. Peterson, 38 Wash.App. 855, 858, 690 P.2d 1192 (1984). Fair market value is the value for which the property could have been sold in the course of a voluntary sale between a willing buyer and a willing seller, taking into account the use to which the property is adapted or could reasonably be adapted. Id. at 859, 690 P.2d 1192. ¶ 16 The unlawful impoundment of a vehicle may be an unjustified, willful interference with another's property sufficient to constitute conversion. Under the common law, a person whose vehicle is unlawfully impounded is not required to seek repossession of such vehicle but may, instead, seek monetary damages. Wash. State Bank v. Medalia Healthcare LLC, 96 Wash.App. 547, 554, 984 P.2d 1041 (1999) (in a conversion action, the plaintiff is under no obligation to take back the converted property rather than seek monetary recovery). This common law cause of action and its remedies are available to Potter unless the legislature clearly expressed its intent to abrogate the common law by making the redemption procedures set forth in RCW 46.55.120 the exclusive remedy for unlawful impoundments.