discussed Cited "see" Adelsperger v. Elkside Development LLC See Hemstreet v. Spears, 282 Or 439, 444 , 579 P2d 229 , appeal dismissed, 439 US 948 (1978) (“[C]on- version is an intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel which so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the chattel.”); Black’s Law Dictionary 268 (9th ed 2009) (defining “chattel” as “[m]ovable or transferable property; personal property; esp. a physical object capable of manual delivery and not the subject matter 826 Adelsperger v. Elkside Development LLC of real proper…

discussed Cited "see" Russo Farms, Inc. v. Vineland Board of Education See Wyoming State Highway Dep’t v. Napolitano, 578 P.2d 1342, 1348 (Wyo.)(citing other jurisdictions upholding such rules), appeal dismissed 439 U.S. 948 , 99 S.Ct. 343 , 58 L.Ed.2d 340 (1978); see also City of San Jose v. Superior Ct., 12 Cal.3d 447 , 115 Cal.Rptr. 797, 802 , 525 P.2d 701 (1974), superseded by Cal. Gov’t Code *113 § 905.1; Brownlow v. City of Calhoun, 198 Ga.App. 710 , 402 S.E.2d 788 (1991).