## Facts

- Michael R. LaPlace boarded his horse, Thunder, at a stable operated by Pierre Briere and related entities under a boarding arrangement.
- LaPlace and his family retained access to Thunder and periodically removed and returned the horse for shows or veterinary care, while the stable generally kept and cared for the horse.
- While Briere was away at a horse show, Charlene Bridgwood went to the stable to help and exercised (lunged) Thunder without LaPlace’s permission.
- After a few minutes of lunging, Thunder collapsed and died; there was no evidence identifying the cause of death.
- Briere and Bridgwood requested a necropsy; LaPlace initially refused and later consented after the remains were no longer available for examination.
- LaPlace sued, asserting conversion against Bridgwood and seeking to hold the stable liable under bailment principles for failure to return the horse.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants and denied LaPlace’s motion for partial summary judgment on liability; LaPlace appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether an unauthorized, brief exercise of a boarded horse constitutes conversion when the horse dies during the exercise and there is no evidence of causation or negligent handling.
2. Whether a stable that boards a horse is liable as a bailee for the horse’s death in its custody absent proof that the death was caused by the bailee’s negligence or conversion.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment for defendants and affirmed denial of LaPlace’s partial-summary-judgment motion.
- Bridgwood’s unauthorized lunging did not constitute conversion because her limited, temporary control did not amount to a serious interference with the owner’s rights, and there was no evidence her conduct caused the death.
- A bailment existed between LaPlace and the stable despite periodic removal and return of the horse.
- The stable was not liable under bailment principles because LaPlace failed to produce evidence that negligent handling by the bailee or its agent caused the horse’s death; any inference of negligence was rebutted by the record and the unknown cause of death.

## Legal Principles

- Conversion requires an intentional exercise of dominion or control that so seriously interferes with the owner’s right to control the chattel that the actor may be required to pay its full value; unauthorized use alone is insufficient without serious interference.
- A bailment is created when chattel is delivered into the sole custody, control, and exclusive possession of another for safekeeping or a specific purpose; periodic removal by the owner does not terminate the bailment, which resumes upon return.
- In a bailment, a bailor may recover for non-return or damage by proving conversion or negligence by the bailee; a prima facie inference of negligence may arise from non-return, but the bailee may rebut it, and the bailor retains the ultimate burden to show negligent conduct and proximate cause.

## Conclusion

The court held that brief unauthorized exercise of a boarded horse, without evidence of serious interference or negligent causation, is not conversion, and that although boarding creates a bailment, the stable was not liable for the horse’s unexplained death absent proof that the bailee’s negligence or conversion caused the loss.


LaPlace v. Briere, 404 N.J. Super. 585, 962 A.2d 1139 (App. Div. 2009)