23 Delaware opinions name it 3 courts 1992–2025 13 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Delaware courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings, L.L.C.green2 sentences2025Summary judgment on Count VII is independently warranted because Cercacor’s “conversion claim does not fall into the narrow exception to the general rule prohibiting claims for the conversion of money.”165 A conversion claim for cash can proceed “only where there is an ‘obligation to return the identical money’ 160 Kuroda, 971 A.2d at 889 . 161 See DMSJ Opp’n at 37-39. 2025Summary judgment on Count VII is independently warranted because Cercacor’s “conversion claim does not fall into the narrow exception to the general rule prohibiting claims for the conversion of money.”165 A conversion claim for cash can proceed “only where there is an ‘obligation to return the identical money’ 160 Kuroda, 971 A.2d at 889 . 161 See DMSJ Opp’n at 37-39. | 6 | 6 |
Drug, Inc. v. Huntgreen2 sentences2024Conversion by merger satisfies the tort of conversion.70 Plaintiff has adequately alleged that the merger was invalid under Section 251, and so has pled a conversion claim. 66 Arnold, 678 A.2d at 536 (citing Drug, Inc. v. Hunt, 168 A. 87 , 93–94 (Del. 1933)). 67 Drug, Inc., 168 A. at 93 . 68 Id. (quoting Layman v. F.F. 2024Conversion by merger satisfies the tort of conversion.70 Plaintiff has adequately alleged that the merger was invalid under Section 251, and so has pled a conversion claim. 66 Arnold, 678 A.2d at 536 (citing Drug, Inc. v. Hunt, 168 A. 87 , 93–94 (Del. 1933)). 67 Drug, Inc., 168 A. at 93 . 68 Id. (quoting Layman v. F.F. | 2 | 4 |
Arnold v. Society for Sayings Bancorp, Inc.green2 sentences2024Conversion by merger satisfies the tort of conversion.70 Plaintiff has adequately alleged that the merger was invalid under Section 251, and so has pled a conversion claim. 66 Arnold, 678 A.2d at 536 (citing Drug, Inc. v. Hunt, 168 A. 87 , 93–94 (Del. 1933)). 67 Drug, Inc., 168 A. at 93 . 68 Id. (quoting Layman v. F.F. 2024Conversion by merger satisfies the tort of conversion.70 Plaintiff has adequately alleged that the merger was invalid under Section 251, and so it has pled a conversion claim. 66 Arnold, 678 A.2d at 536 (citing Drug, Inc. v. Hunt, 168 A. 87 , 93–94 (Del. 1933)). 67 Drug, Inc., 168 A. at 93 . 68 Id. (quoting Layman v. F.F. | 2 | 4 |
In Re Wheelabrator Technologies, Inc. Shareholders Litigationgreen2 sentences2025Cercacor’s Count VII alleges “Defendants committed conversion” by “breaching the LOI, and unduly delaying and burdening the completion of a final purchase agreement.”155 Conversion is an “‘act of dominion wrongfully exerted over the property of another, in denial of his right, or inconsistent with it.’”156 Metronom contends Count VII fails because Cercacor does not identify any recoverable property independent of the LOI.157 Instead, Count VII ties Cercacor’s recovery to a breach of the LOI.158 Cercacor only replies that Count VII survives because “the parties [] dispute whether the LOI govern 2025Cercacor’s Count VII alleges “Defendants committed conversion” by “breaching the LOI, and unduly delaying and burdening the completion of a final purchase agreement.”155 Conversion is an “‘act of dominion wrongfully exerted over the property of another, in denial of his right, or inconsistent with it.’”156 Metronom contends Count VII fails because Cercacor does not identify any recoverable property independent of the LOI.157 Instead, Count VII ties Cercacor’s recovery to a breach of the LOI.158 Cercacor only replies that Count VII survives because “the parties [] dispute whether the LOI govern | 2 | 2 |
Gilbert v. El Paso Co.green2 sentences2025Ch. 1995) (citing Gilbert v. El Paso Co., 575 A.2d 1131, 1142 (Del. 1990)). 155 Compl. ¶¶ 80-83. 156 Arnold v. Society for Sav. 2025Ch. 1995) (citing Gilbert v. El Paso Co., 575 A.2d 1131, 1142 (Del. 1990)). 155 Compl. ¶¶ 80-83. 156 Arnold v. Society for Sav. | 2 | 2 |
Layman v. Slocomb & Co.green2 sentences2024Slocomb & Co., 76 A. 1094, 1095 (Del. 1909)). 69 See 8 Del. 2024Slocomb & Co., 76 A. 1094, 1095 (Del. 1909)). 69 See 8 Del. | 2 | 2 |
Wood v. Coastal States Gas Corp.green2 sentences2004See Moran v. Household Int’l, Inc., 500 A.2d 1346, 1352 (Del.1985) (" 'Anti-destruction' clauses generally ensure holders of certain securities of the protection of their right of conversion in the event of a merger by giving them the right to convert their securities into whatever securities are to replace the stock of their company.”); Wood v. Coastal States Gas Corp., 401 A.2d 932, 939 (Del.1979) (anti-destruction clauses may be triggered by "events that will not merely dilute the conversion privilege by altering the number of shares of common but, rather, may destroy the conversion privile 1998See, e.g., Wood v. Coastal States Gas Corp., Del.Supr., 401 A.2d 932, 939 (1979) (recognizing that transactions triggering the operation of anti-destruction clauses “are the kind of events that will not merely dilute the conversion privilege by altering the number of shares of common but, rather, may destroy the conversion privilege by eliminating the stock into which a preferred share is convertible .”); R. | 2 | 2 |
Goodrich v. E.F. Hutton Group, Inc.green2 sentences2021Hutton Grp., Inc., 542 A.2d 1200, 1203 (Del. 2009Goodrich, 542 A.2d at 1203 . 57 . | 1 | 2 |
McGowan v. Ferrogreen2 sentences2024Where a conversion claim is “based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract[, the plaintiff] generally must sue in contract, and not in 132 McGowan v. Ferro, 859 A.2d 1012, 1040 (Del. 2024Where a conversion claim is “based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract[, the plaintiff] generally must sue in contract, and not in 132 McGowan v. Ferro, 859 A.2d 1012, 1040 (Del. | 1 | 1 |
Leal v. Meeksgreen1 sentence2021Even so, in my view, while it is not certain that a “buyout” 152 Viacom, 2020 WL 7711128 , at *25 (dismissing claims against an executive notwithstanding the existence of a controller and the application of entire fairness because the complaint failed to allege wrongdoing as against that executive); see, e.g., In re Cornerstone Therapeutics, Inc. S’holder Litig., 115 A.3d 1173 , 1182–83 (Del. 2015) (noting that, even when a controller exists and entire fairness applies to the controller’s action, the presumption of the business judgment rule still applies for each individual fiduciary unless s | 1 | 1 |
Battista v. Chrysler Corp.green1 sentence2020In considering motions to dismiss, the Court must assume that all well-pled facts in the complaint are true.* Conversion is defined as an “act of dominion wrongfully exerted over the property of another, in denial of his right, or inconsistent with it.”> To prove conversion, a plaintiff must show: 1) That the plaintiff had a property interest in the converted property; 2) plaintiff had a right to possession of the property; and 3) defendant wrongfully possessed or disposed of the property as if it were their own.® Because Delaware law focuses on whether the conversion claim relates to “specifi | 1 | 1 |
Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.green1 sentence2019“Under Delaware law, a plaintiff bringing a claim based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract generally must sue in contract, and not in 20 Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 7 Cal.4th 1238, 1257 (Cal. 1994). 21 Green v. Ralee Engineering Co., 19 Cal.4th 66, 78 (Cal. 1998). 11 tort.”2 “[C]ourts recognize that a breach of contract will not generally constitute a tort.””3 Defendants concede that if they are liable for breach of contract, then the 488 common units potentially could be part of the measure of damages. | 1 | 1 |
Green v. Ralee Engineering Co.green1 sentence2019“Under Delaware law, a plaintiff bringing a claim based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract generally must sue in contract, and not in 20 Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 7 Cal.4th 1238, 1257 (Cal. 1994). 21 Green v. Ralee Engineering Co., 19 Cal.4th 66, 78 (Cal. 1998). 11 tort.”2 “[C]ourts recognize that a breach of contract will not generally constitute a tort.””3 Defendants concede that if they are liable for breach of contract, then the 488 common units potentially could be part of the measure of damages. | 1 | 1 |
Arcadian Phosphates, Inc., Judas Azuelos, and Eli Sivan v. Arcadian Corporationgreen1 sentence2017Convoy Corp. v. Chrysler Corp., 208 A.2d 519, 521 (Del. 1965)). 64 Addy, 2009 WL 707641 , at *22-23. 65 Id.; Alltrista Plastics, 2013 WL 5210255 , at *10. 66 Addy, 2009 WL 707641 , at *22-23 (citing Arcadian Phosphates, Inc. v. Arcadian Corp., 884 F.2d 69, 74 (2d Cir. 1989)). 18 Conversion is “any distinct act of dominion wrongfully exerted over the property of another, in denial of [the plaintiff's] right, or inconsistent with it.”67 “Under Delaware law, a plaintiff bringing a claim based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract generally must sue in contract, and not in tort.”68 To | 1 | 1 |
Metropolitan Convoy Corp. v. Chrysler Corp.green1 sentence2017Convoy Corp. v. Chrysler Corp., 208 A.2d 519, 521 (Del. 1965)). 64 Addy, 2009 WL 707641 , at *22-23. 65 Id.; Alltrista Plastics, 2013 WL 5210255 , at *10. 66 Addy, 2009 WL 707641 , at *22-23 (citing Arcadian Phosphates, Inc. v. Arcadian Corp., 884 F.2d 69, 74 (2d Cir. 1989)). 18 Conversion is “any distinct act of dominion wrongfully exerted over the property of another, in denial of [the plaintiff's] right, or inconsistent with it.”67 “Under Delaware law, a plaintiff bringing a claim based entirely upon a breach of the terms of a contract generally must sue in contract, and not in tort.”68 To | 1 | 1 |
Moran v. Household International, Inc.green1 sentence2004See Moran v. Household Int’l, Inc., 500 A.2d 1346, 1352 (Del.1985) (" 'Anti-destruction' clauses generally ensure holders of certain securities of the protection of their right of conversion in the event of a merger by giving them the right to convert their securities into whatever securities are to replace the stock of their company.”); Wood v. Coastal States Gas Corp., 401 A.2d 932, 939 (Del.1979) (anti-destruction clauses may be triggered by "events that will not merely dilute the conversion privilege by altering the number of shares of common but, rather, may destroy the conversion privile | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Delaware. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Walls v. Rees
green
2 sentences2021The Supreme Court therefore held a conversion claim could lie “for the recovery of a sum of money equivalent to the value of the property claimed if the defendant cannot or will not surrender possession.” Id. at 1167 . 2021The Supreme Court therefore held a conversion claim could lie “for the recovery of a sum of money equivalent to the value of the property claimed if the defendant cannot or will not surrender possession.” Id. at 1167 . | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Acadia Technology, Inc. v. United States
green
1 sentence2021For the reasons set forth herein, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED without prejudice to a validly stated replevin claim or a properly filed Rule 41 motion. 55 Acadia Tech., Inc., 458 F.3d at 1334 . 56 Del. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Scott Pontone v. Milso Industries Corporation
green
2 sentences2021Ch. 2006) (finding the causal connection requirement satisfied where a former officer allegedly misappropriated corporate trade secrets obtained while serving as an officer); Pontone, 100 A.3d at 1052 . 17 convey to Avande” information he and his agents obtained during his tenure. 72 Regarding the conversion claim, Avande alleged that Evans had access to the company’s confidential financial, accounting, and other business records “[d]uring the time Evans served as CEO” and that he continued to access the confidential company records post-separation without authorization.73 These are covered ac 2021Sept. 11, 2015). 82 Id. at *17 (citing the plaintiff’s brief). 83 Id. 84 Id. 85 Id. (quoting Pontone, 100 A.3d at 1051 ). 20 Unlike the conversion claim, neither the tortious interference nor defamation claim obviously concern confidential information. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Istituto Bancario Italiano SpA v. Hunter Engineering Co.
green
2 sentences2019A. The Tortious Conspiracy The first Istituto Bancario elements asks whether a tortious conspiracy existed.187 The second Istituto Bancario elements asks whether the defendant was a member of that conspiracy.188 Although Istituto Bancario literally speaks in terms of a “conspiracy to defraud,” the principle is not limited to that particular tort.189 In this case, the relevant torts are fraud and conversion.190 Because the analysis of the conversion claim is sufficient to establish jurisdiction, this decision only addresses that tort. 187 449 A.2d at 225 . 188 Id. 189 See id. at 222–25 (describ 2019A. The Tortious Conspiracy The first Istituto Bancario elements asks whether a tortious conspiracy existed.187 The second Istituto Bancario elements asks whether the defendant was a member of that conspiracy.188 Although Istituto Bancario literally speaks in terms of a “conspiracy to defraud,” the principle is not limited to that particular tort.189 In this case, the relevant torts are fraud and conversion.190 Because the analysis of the conversion claim is sufficient to establish jurisdiction, this decision only addresses that tort. 187 449 A.2d at 225 . 188 Id. 189 See id. at 222–25 (describ | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Beard Research, Inc. v. Kates
green
1 sentence2018Alarm also relies on Overdrive, where this court permitted a conversion claim to proceed notwithstanding the preemption provision in DUTSA.59 The court reasoned that for preemption under DUTSA to apply, the claims must be “grounded in the same facts,” which means that “the same facts are used to establish all the elements of both claims.”60 The Overdrive court held that the success of the plaintiff’s conversion claim did not “necessarily depend on the success of plaintiff’s misappropriation of trade secrets claim”61 and that no element of a claim for conversion turned on whether the plaintiff’ | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Loretto Literary & Benevolent Institution v. Blue Diamond Coal Co.
green
1 sentence1992Defendants cite Loretto Literary and Benevolent Institution v. Blue Diamond Coal Co., Del.Ch., 444 A.2d 256 (1982), as a basis of its claim that the conversion standard of damages should not be applied if the plaintiff was able to transfer the subject stock at all relevant times. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.