Irving Nelkin & Co. v. South Beverly Hills Wilshire Jewelry & Loan

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 4th 692·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 801·2005 D.A.R. 5794·28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 815·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4262
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 2005B172543California5,025 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

This case arises from a claim for conversion by the owner/consignor of a number of valuable wholesale diamonds. Two primary issues are presented. First, while the successful plaintiff in an action for conversion is entitled to recover prejudgment interest from the time of the conversion (Civ. Code, § 3336), at what point does the plaintiff’s right to recover such interest end? Second, on the basis of what valuation evidence should such interest be calculated? We answer the first question by holding that even where the plaintiff may have regained possession of the converted goods by use of a bonded writ of possession, plaintiff’s right to recover interest will run until entry of a judgment resolving the issue of disputed title; in this case, that question was resolved by the trial court’s summary adjudication of the title issue in plaintiff’s favor. With respect to the valuation question, we hold that plaintiff’s evidence of the prior dealings of the parties and plaintiff’s memorandum valuation of goods delivered on consignment was sufficient to establish the value of the converted goods.

We will therefore amend the judgment that was entered in favor of plaintiff so as to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.