TROVER - The Law Mind Legal Dictionary

TROVERAuthored

The Law Mind • 1253 words

Definition

An action at common law to recover damages for the wrongful conversion of personal property. Trover — formally styled "trover and conversion" — originated as a claim against a person who found another's goods and refused to return them, instead appropriating them to his own use. Over time, the "finding" element became a pure legal fiction: the plaintiff no longer needed to show that the defendant had literally found the goods. What mattered was that the plaintiff had a property interest in the chattel, the defendant exercised dominion over it inconsistently with the plaintiff's rights, and damages resulted. The remedy was not the return of the goods but the recovery of their value in money.

Common Language

Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Taking possession of personal property which has been found; a legal action brought to recover such property by its original owner.

Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "The gaining possession of any goods, whether by finding or by other means. An action to recover damages against one who found goods, and would not deliver them to the owner on demand."

Both definitions carry a residual suggestion that the defendant must have literally found the plaintiff's property. In law, that requirement was discarded early. The "finding" allegation was a formal fiction retained for procedural reasons; the real gravamen of the action was wrongful conversion, which could arise from any unlawful assertion of dominion — not just discovery of lost goods. A researcher relying on the plain-English or historical common sense of the word risks misreading the actual scope of the action as it was litigated.

Common Confusion

Trover is frequently confused with replevin and detinue, which are related but distinct actions for interference with personal property. Replevin seeks the return of the specific chattel (with damages as a secondary remedy); trover seeks only the value of the chattel. Detinue, the older action, also sought the return of the specific thing or its value, but was procedurally cumbersome, which contributed to trover's rise as the preferred remedy. The distinctions matter in historical research because courts in earlier periods were precise about which writ a party had elected, and an error in form could be fatal to the claim. Trover should also be distinguished from trespass to chattels, which redressed direct, forcible interference with goods rather than the broader category of conversion.

Core Elements

For a trover action to lie at common law, a plaintiff generally had to establish four things:

Property in the plaintiff — the plaintiff had ownership or a right to immediate possession of the goods at the time of conversion.
Loss or parting with possession — originally, that the goods were lost by the plaintiff and found by the defendant; later, a formal fiction merely alleged in the pleadings.
Finding by the defendant — the counterpart fiction; defendant was alleged to have come into possession of the goods.
Conversion — the defendant wrongfully converted the goods to his own use, meaning he exercised control over the chattel in a manner inconsistent with the plaintiff's rights. Conversion was the operative element; the rest was pleading scaffolding.

Why It Matters in Research

Trover is a foundational common law form of action that was formally abolished in England by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852 and subsequently displaced in American jurisdictions by code pleading reforms (following the Field Code of 1848 and its state-level successors). In modern practice, trover has been absorbed into the tort of conversion. A researcher reading pre-abolition case law must understand that when courts discuss "trover," they are often resolving questions that today would be analyzed entirely under conversion doctrine — but the procedural constraints and pleading rules of the old form of action shaped how courts reasoned about property rights in ways that do not map cleanly onto modern analysis.

The fictional nature of the "finding" allegation is a recurring source of confusion in older sources. Eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century treatises sometimes described trover in terms that suggest the plaintiff must show actual loss and actual finding; later sources clarify that these were formal recitals. Researchers working with American sources from the early republic need to check whether the jurisdiction had already recognized the fictional character of these elements or was still requiring something closer to their literal proof.

Jurisdictional variation is significant for timing. Some American states abolished the common law forms of action earlier than others; in those jurisdictions, conversion cases decided after code adoption may cite trover precedents without using the word, while in states that retained common law pleading longer, "trover" remained a live term of art deep into the nineteenth century.

The connection between trover and bailment law is important and often underexplored. Trover was frequently the vehicle through which courts developed rules about a bailee's liability for misdelivery or unauthorized use — questions that now fall under conversion but were shaped by the requirements of the trover action.

Historical Dictionary Support

The historical dictionaries converge on the essentials: trover is an action for conversion of personal goods, the "finding" allegation was a fiction, and the remedy was damages rather than the thing itself. Burrill is the most etymologically precise, tracing the term to the Law French trover (to find) and offering illustrative Old English uses. Anderson provides a clean structural summary and correctly emphasizes that the action was "in form, a fiction; in substance, a remedy." Black's (both editions) and Black's 2nd track each other closely and are the most useful for practitioners because they note that the action became available for any wrongful conversion, not merely cases of actual finding.

The Bouvier excerpt reproduced in the source material is mismatched — it describes labor and materials furnished in what appears to be a quantum meruit or mechanics' lien context, not trover. This is a reminder that historical dictionary pagination and excerpt accuracy can fail, and researchers should verify Bouvier entries against a complete edition.

What the historical dictionaries collectively underemphasize is the procedural history of why trover displaced detinue and why it was itself eventually displaced by the simpler pleading of conversion. The internal logic of common law writ development — why litigants preferred one form over another — requires supplementing the dictionary entries with treatise sources such as Blackstone's Commentaries (Book III) or Chitty on Pleading.

Jurisdictional Note

In England, trover as a distinct form of action was abolished by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852. In the United States, the timeline varied by state depending on when code pleading was adopted. Modern American law treats the substance of trover as subsumed within the tort of conversion; the historical label appears in case citations but carries no independent procedural significance in contemporary litigation.

TROVERmain

Black's Law Dictionary • 1891

In common-law practice, the action of trover (or trover and conversion) is a species of action on the case, and origi- nally lay for the recovery of damages against a person who had found another's goods and wrongfully converted them to his own use. Subsequently the allegation of the loss of the goods by the plaintiff and the finding of them by the defendant was merely fictitious, and the action became the remedy for any wrong- ful interference with or detention of the goods of another. 3 Steph. Comm. 425. Sweet. *

TROVERmain

Bouvier's Law Dictionary • 1928

Work performed; 11 Mass. 37; 19 Ark. 671; 1 Hempst. 240; 94 Ala. 194; 42 Conn. 226; 97 N. Y. 293; and materials furnished; 7 Pick. 181; with the knowledge of the defendant; 20 Johns. 28; 1 M'Cord 22; 19 Ark. 671; so that he derives benefit there- from; 27 Mo. 308; 11 Ired. 84; whether there be an express contract or not. Also, where there is an express promise to pay for extra work, although the contract re- quires that the estimate should be in writ- ing; 96 Ala. 348. As to whether anything can be recovered where the contract is to work a specified time and the labor is per- formed during a portion of that time only, see 29 Vt. 219; 25 Conn. 188; 6 Ohio St. 505; 1 Sneed 622; 24 Barb. 174; 23 Mo. 228. Services performed by relatives for one in his lifetime, but in the absence of an ex- press or implied contract for payment, can- not be recovered for after his death; 31 III. App. 340. One may recover for work and material on an implied assumpsit although the work is destroyed before its completion; 153 Mass. 517. Use and occupation of the plaintiff's premises under a parol contract express or implied; 7 J. J. Marsh. 6; 13 Johns. 240; 4 Day 28; 11 Pick. 1; 4 Hen. & M. 161; 3 Harr. N. J. 214; 1 How. 153; 30 Vt. 277; 31 Ala. N. S. 412; 41 Me. 446; 3 Cal. 196; 4 Gray 329; but not if it be tortious; 2 N. & MC. 156; 3 S. & R. 500; 10 Gill & J. 149; 6 Ν. Η. 298; 14 Ohio 244; 10 Vt. 502; see 20 Me. 525; 76 Ala. 394; 80 Mo. 199; or where defendant enters under a contract for a deed; 6 Johns. 46; 3 Conn. 203; 4 Ala. 294; 7 Pick. 301; 2 Dana 295. The relation of landlord and tenant must exist expressly or impliedly; 1 Dutch. 293;6 Ind. 412; 19 Ga. 313. And in many other cases, as, for instance, for a breach of promise of marriage; 2 Mass. 73; 2 Overt. 233; to recover the pur- chase-money for land sold; 14 Johns. 162, 210; 20 id. 338; 3 M'Cord 421; and, specially, upon wagers; 2 Chit. Pl. 114; feigned issues; 2 Chit. Pl. 116; upon foreign judgments; 11 East 124; 8 Term 493; 8 Mass. 273; 5 Johns. 132; but not on a judgment obtained in a sister state; 1 Bibb 361; 19 Johns. 162; 11 Me 94; 14 Vt. 92; 2 Rawle 431; and see 2 Brev. N. C. 99; money, due under an award; 9 Mass. 198; 21 Pick. 247; where the defendant has ob- tained possession of the plaintiff's property by a tort for which trespass or case would lie: 10 Pick. 161; 3 Dutch. 43; 5 Harr. Del. 38; 21 Ga. 526; or, having rightful possession, has tortiously sold the property; 12 Pick. 452, 120; 1 J. J. Marsh. 543; 8 Watts 277; 3 Dana 552; 1 N. H. 151; 4 Call 451; 2 Gill & J. 326; 3 Wis. 649; or converted it to his own beneficial use; 4 Term 211; 8 M. & S. 191; 13 Mass. 454; 7 Pick. 133; 1 N. H. 451; 29 Ala. 332; 41 Me. 565; 1 Hempst. 240: 3 Sneed 454; 3 Ia. 599; or where a sheriff pays money to subsequent lienor by order of court, which order is subsequently reversed, the attach- ing creditor may recover of the lienor; 132 N. Y. 363; or where one purchases a bond relying on the seller's recommendation that it is good, when in fact it is worthless; 86 Mich. 261. The action may be brought for a sum specified in the promise of the defendant, or for the definite amount of money ascer- tained by computation to be due, or for as much as the services, etc., were worth (called a quantum meruit), or for the value of the goods, etc. (called a quantum vale- bant). The value of services performed under a contract void by the statute of frauds is recoverable on quantum meruit; 20 Nev. 168; 40 Kans. 367; a city is liable for water supplied after termination of the contract; 110 N. C. 449; one hired to do work, but who is wrongfully stopped, may recover on quantum meruit what the labor is worth, regardless of its value to the other party; 82 Mich. 263. The form of the action, whether general or special, depends upon the nature of the undertaking of the parties, whether it be express or implied, and upon other circum- stances. In many cases where there has been an express agreement between the parties, the plaintiff may neglect the special contract and sue in general assumpsit. He may do this: first, where the contract is executed; 4 B. & P. 355; 5 B. & C. 628; 18 Johns. 451; 19 Pick. 496; 11 Wheat. 237; 3 T. B. Monr. 405; 7 Vt. 228; 5 Harr. & G. 45; 3 M'Cord 421; 18 Ga. 364; and is for the payment of money; 2 Munf. 344; 1 J. J. Marsh. 894; 3 T. B. Monr. 405; 1 Bibb 395; 4 Gray 292; though if a time be fixed for its payment, not until the expiration of that time; 1 Stark. 229; second, where the contract, though only partially executed, has been abandoned by mutual consent; 7 Term 181; 12 Johns. 274; 16 Wend. 632; 16 Me. 283; 11 Rich. S. C. 52; 7 Cal. 150; see 29 Pa. 82; or extinguished and rescinded by some act of the defendant; 11 Me 317; 2 Blackf. 167; 20 N. H. 457; see 4 Crа. 239; third, where that which the plaintiff has done has been performed under a special agreement, but not in the time or manner agreed, but yet has been beneficial to the defendant and has been accepted and en

TROVERmain

Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) • 1910

In common-law practice, the action of trover (or trover and conversion) is a species of action on the case, and originally lay for the recovery of damages against a person who had found another's goods and wrongfully converted them to his own use. Subsequently the allegation of the loss of the goods by the plaintiff and the finding of them by the defendant was merely fictitious, and the action became the remedy for any wrongful interference with or detention of the goods of another. 38 Steph. Comm. 428. Sweet. See Burnham v. Pidcock, 33 Miec. Rep. 65, 66 N. X¥. Supp. 806; Larson v. Daw: cermcenae

TROVERn.

Websters Unabridged Dictionary (1913) • 1913

The gaining possession of any goods, whether by finding or by other means. An action to recover damages against one who found goods, and would not deliver them to the owner on demand; an action which lies in any case to recover the value of goods wrongfully converted by another to his own use. In this case the finding, though alleged, is an immaterial fact; the injury lies in the conversion.

trovernoun

Wiktionary (English) • 2026

Wiktionary contributors • CC BY-SA 4.0 • via Kaikki
Extracted and formatted for display by Law Mind. Source link opens the current Wiktionary page and its contributor history; it is not a frozen copy of this extract.

Taking possession of personal property which has been found. | A legal action brought to recover such property by its original owner.

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

Subscribe Encyclopedia Sign In