360 F. Supp. 2d 533 - Moses v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the property subject to conversion is a specific identifiable thing; (2) plaintiff had ownership, possession or control over the property before its conversion; and (3) defendant 'exercised an unauthorized dominion over the thing in question, to the alteration of its condition or to the exclusion of the plaintiff's rights.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bd. of Managers of Trump Tower at City Ctr. Condo. v. Palazzolo · Shafferman v. Queens Borough Public Library (In re JMK Construction Group, Ltd.)

2. “[A]n action for conversion cannot be validly maintained where damages are merely being sought for breach of contract. Rather, a plaintiff must show acts that were unlawful or wrongful as opposed to mere violations of contractual rights.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 759 F. Supp. 2d 301 - In Re Refco Securities Litigation · 332 F. Supp. 3d 488 - Stanley Works Isr. Ltd. v. 500 Grp., Inc.

3. “continued retention of the payments collected from [Plaintiff] without authorization and in defiance of [P]laintiff's superior right of ownership is sufficient to establish conversion as an action distinct from any breach of contract claim.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 370 F. Supp. 3d 420 - Solomatina v. Mikelic