Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In some cases the exercise of the dominion may amount to an act of trespass or to a crime, e.g. where the taking amounts to larceny, or fraudulent appropriation by a bailee or agent entrusted with the property of another (Larceny Acts of 1861 and 1901). Fraudulent conversion by any person to his own use (or that of persons other than the owner ...
The two-pronged definition of fraudulent conversion is "conversion [n 1] that is committed by the use of fraud, either by obtaining the property, or in withholding it". [1] In England and Wales, the term fraudulent conversion was superseded by the identically named offences under the Larceny Act 1901 and sections 20 and 21 of the Larceny Act 1916.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit determined in Rock Island Improvement Co. v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc., 698 F.2d 1075 (10th Cir. 1984) that the Oklahoma Supreme Court relied on an Oklahoma statute providing that "no person can recover a greater amount in damages for a breach of an obligation than he would have gained by ...
Lawful possession: The critical element is that the embezzler must have been in lawful possession of the property at the time of the fraudulent conversion, and not merely have custody of the property. If the thief had lawful possession of the property, the crime is embezzlement; if the thief merely had custody, the crime at common law is larceny.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
In the United States, fraudulent conveyances or transfers [11] are governed by two sets of laws that are generally consistent. The first is the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act [12] ("UFTA") that has been adopted by all but a handful of the states. [13] The second is found in the Federal Bankruptcy Code. [14]
In summary, although it may be well intentioned, the Oklahoma Survivor’s Act is an invitation for fraud. Criminal defendants are already afforded an opportunity to present mitigating evidence of ...
State Question 755, also known as the Save Our State Amendment, was a legislatively-referred ballot measure held on November 2, 2010, alongside the 2010 Oklahoma elections. The ballot measure, which passed with over 70% of the vote, added bans on Sharia law and international law to the Oklahoma state constitution .