G.L. c. 260, § 2A; G.L. c. 247 (replevin); G.L. c. 231, § 6B
Conversion in Massachusetts — three years, and demand matters
A claim in Massachusetts trial courts · Last verified August 26, 2026
Conversion is the tort for personal property someone else has taken over. It is not theft — the defendant's state of mind barely matters — and it is not about damage to the item. It is about someone exercising dominion over your property inconsistent with your rights.
The practical questions on this page are three: whether you have to demand the property back first, whether you want the item or its value, and whether the facts also support a claim that pays attorney's fees, since this one does not.
What the claim is
Someone took your personal property, or kept it after they should have given it back, and treated it as theirs.
Where the right comes from
Common law.
What a plaintiff has to prove
- The plaintiff owned or had a right to possess the property at the time;
- The defendant intentionally exercised dominion or control over it;
- The exercise was inconsistent with the plaintiff's rights — and where possession began lawfully, that the plaintiff demanded return and the defendant refused; and
- Damages.
"Intentionally" refers to the act, not to any wrongful purpose. A defendant who believed in good faith that the property was theirs has still converted it. Good faith goes to punitive exposure and to the equities, not to liability.
The interference must be serious. Briefly moving something, using it in a trivial way, or touching it is not conversion — the law asks whether the defendant's dealings were so extensive that it is fair to make them buy the item.
Demand and refusal
This element decides the timing of many cases, and it turns on how the defendant came to have the property.
Where the taking was wrongful from the start — a theft, a stranger driving off with equipment — no demand is required. The claim accrues at the taking.
Where possession began lawfully — a repair shop, a warehouse, a friend who borrowed it, a consignee, a former employee holding company equipment — the possession was not wrongful when it started. It becomes wrongful when the holder refuses to give the property back. The demand is what makes the retention a conversion, and the three-year clock generally runs from the refusal.
That has a consequence plaintiffs miss: a demand made years later can start the claim years later. It also means a written, dated demand is worth making even when the answer is obvious, because it fixes the accrual date.
What can be converted
Tangible personal property — goods, vehicles, equipment, cash in an identifiable form, documents, livestock.
Property rights merged into a document — a stock certificate, a promissory note, a bill of lading.
Not real estate. The equivalents there are trespass, ejectment and the title actions.
Not, generally, an intangible idea or a general debt. A claim that someone owes you money is a contract claim, not a conversion — unless the money was a specific identifiable fund held for you.
Electronic records and data occupy a contested middle ground, and a plaintiff whose data was taken should look hard at the trade-secret and computer statutes as well.
Conversion or replevin — the choice
They are alternatives, and the difference is what you get back.
Conversion pays you the value of the property. In effect the defendant is made to buy it. Title passes with the judgment, and if the item has since appreciated, you get the value at conversion, not today's.
Replevin returns the property itself. It runs under G.L. c. 247, requires a bond, and gets the thing back — which is the right choice for property that is unique, irreplaceable or worth more to you than the market says.
For a plaintiff who needs the item held in place while the case runs, the attachment and trustee process rules — Rule 4.1 and Rule 4.2 — are the security devices.
How long you have to file
Three years under G.L. c. 260, § 2A, which by its terms covers actions "for taking, detaining or injuring goods or chattels."
Accrual is the wrongful taking, or the refusal after demand where possession began lawfully.
What has to happen before you file
A demand for return, where the defendant's possession began lawfully.
What the claim pays
The fair market value of the property at the time and place of the conversion, which is the standard measure. Not replacement cost, and not what it was worth when new.
Twelve percent prejudgment interest from the date the action was commenced, under G.L. c. 231, § 6B. On an old conversion this is substantial.
Consequential damages where they were foreseeable — lost use of a converted vehicle or a tool of trade.
No punitive damages at common law.
No attorney's fees.
Where the property was obtained by fraud, look elsewhere for the multiplier. G.L. c. 231, § 85J trebles damages against a person who "by deceit or fraud, sells personal property" — it is a buyer's remedy against a fraudulent seller, and it belongs on the fraud page rather than here. A conversion in trade or commerce can, however, be an unfair or deceptive act, and chapter 93A is the practical route to a multiplier and to mandatory fees.
Who can be sued
Whoever exercised dominion over the property — including a person who received it innocently from the taker. A good-faith purchaser from a thief is liable in conversion to the true owner, because a thief has no title to pass.
An employer, for an employee's conversion within the scope of employment.
A bailee who lost, sold or refused to return goods entrusted to them.
Common defenses
- The plaintiff had no possessory right at the time — a secured party, a co-owner, or a landlord exercising a lien may be entitled to hold the property.
- Consent or authorisation.
- No demand, where possession began lawfully.
- The interference was not serious enough to require the defendant to buy the item.
- A legal right to retain — an artisan's lien, a warehouse lien, a statutory right of disposition.
- Abandonment.
- Limitations — three years from the taking or the refusal.
What people get wrong
Conversion makes the defendant buy the item; replevin gets it back. Choose deliberately, because the judgment in conversion transfers what is left of your interest.
Where they got it lawfully, demand first. No demand, no refusal, no claim — and the demand also fixes when the clock started.
Good faith is not a defence. An honest mistake about ownership is still conversion.
Not every unpaid debt is a conversion. Money owed is a contract claim unless it was a specific identifiable fund.
There are no fees and no multiplier here. The routes to those are chapter 93A, or § 85J where the facts involve a fraudulent sale.
Where it came from
Conversion descends from trover, an action that rested on a pleading fiction: the plaintiff alleged they had lost the goods and the defendant had found and kept them. Nobody believed the finding, and courts allowed it because the alternative writs were clumsy — detinue let the defendant choose to return the item, and trespass required a wrongful taking.
Trover solved both problems by treating the defendant's dealing as a forced sale. That remains the tort's defining feature: a conversion judgment does not order anything returned. It fixes the value and makes the defendant pay it.
Everything else follows from the forced-sale idea. The interference must be serious, because a minor one does not justify making someone buy the item. Damages run to value at the time of conversion, because that is when the notional sale happened. And a plaintiff who wants the property rather than the money has to go somewhere else — which is what replevin is for.
Common questions
How long do I have to sue for conversion in Massachusetts?
Three years, from the wrongful taking or from the refusal to return after your demand.
Do I have to ask for my property back first?
Yes, where the defendant came to possess it lawfully. A demand and refusal is what makes the retention a conversion.
Can I get the item back instead of money?
Yes, through replevin under G.L. c. 247 — a different action, with a bond, which returns the property itself.
What if the defendant thought it was theirs?
Still conversion. Good faith affects the equities, not liability.
Can I recover attorney's fees?
No. Chapter 93A is the route where the conduct was unfair or deceptive in trade or commerce.
Someone owes me money. Is that conversion?
Generally no. A debt is a contract claim unless the money was a specific identifiable fund held for you.