In Louisiana, "an act of conversion is an intentional tort committed in derogation of the plaintiff's possessory rights." Dileo v. Horn, 15-684, p. 9 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16); 189 So. 3d 1189, 1198. Conversion is "committed when any of the following occurs: (1) possession is acquired in an unauthorized manner; (2) the chattel is removed from one place to another with the intent to exercise control over it; (3) possession of the chattel is transferred without authority; (4) possession is withheld from the owner or possessor; (5) the chattel is altered or destroyed; (6) the chattel is used improperly; or (7) ownership is asserted over the chattel." Id., 189 So. 3d at 1198.

Therefore, if a "trial court’s reasons for judgment are flawed, but the judgment is correct," then "the judgment controls." McDuffie, 2019-344, pp. 5-6, 287 So.3d at 903-04 (citing Dileo v. Horn, 2015-684, p. 27 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1208). This is because "[a]ppellate courts examine the result of the judgment rather than the reasons."

We are, therefore, compelled to find reversible legal error. SeeAnders v. Boudion , 93-0894 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/29/94), 636 So.2d 1029, 1032 ; Dileo v. Horn , 15-0684, p. 25 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1207 ; Smith v. Ebey , 04-0889, p. 4 (La. App. 3 Cir. 12/29/04), 896 So.2d 143, 147. "When an appellate court finds the trial court made a reversible error of law, it is required, whenever the state of the record on appeal so allows, to redetermine the facts de novo from the entire record and render a judgment on the merits."

Persons deal with the chattels or exercise acts of ownership over them at their peril, and must take the risk that there is no lawful justification for their acts. Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Hinrichs , 486 So. 2d 116 (La. 1986) ; Jones v. Americas Ins. Co. , 2016-0904 (La. App. 1 Cir. 8/16/17), 226 So. 3d 537 ; Deposit Guar. Nat. Bank v. Central La. Grain Co-op., Inc. , 1998-1976 (La. App. 3 Cir. 5/5/99), 737 So. 2d 167, writdenied , 99-1582 (La. 9/17/99), 747 So. 2d 564 ; Dileo v. Horn , 2015-684 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So. 3d 1189. Although a party may have rightfully come into possession of another's goods, the subsequent refusal to surrender the goods to one who is entitled to them may constitute conversion.

Louisiana defines conversion as “an act in derogation of the plaintiffs possessory rights, and any wrongful exercise or assumption of authority over another's goods, depriving him of the possession, permanently or for an indefinite time . . . .” Quealy v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc., 475 So.2d 756,760 (La. 1985) (emphasis added); see also Dileo v. Horn, 189 So.3d 1189, 1198 (La. Ct. App. 5 Cir. 2016) (“Conversion is committed when one wrongfully does any act of dominion over the property of another in denial of or inconsistent with the owner's rights.”).

Id. (quoting Dileo v. Horn, 2015-684, p. 27 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1208). The rationale behind this longstanding principle is that when the trial court provides written reasons, these simply "set forth the basis for the [trial] court's holding and are not binding."

[6–11] Conversion is an intentional tort and consists of an act in derogation of the plaintiff’s possessory rights. Dileo v. Horn, 15-684 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1198. The tort of conversion is committed when one wrongfully does any act of dominion over the property of another in denial of or inconsistent with the owner’s rights.

Additionally, in discussing reasons for judgment, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal has explained that "[a]ppellate courts examine the result of the judgment rather than the reasons." Dileo v. Horn, 2015-684, p. 27 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1208 (citing Dufresne v. Dufresne, 2010-963, p. 6 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/10/11), 65 So.3d 749, 754). This relates back to the notion that while the district court has considerable discretion in ruling on a motion to continue, the circumstances of the case control.

Appellate courts examine the result of the judgment and not the reasons for judgment. Dileo v. Horn, 15-684 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1208. Consequently, judgments are often upheld on appeal for reasons different than those assigned by the trial court.

Conversion is an intentional tort and consists of an act in derogation of the plaintiff's possessory rights. Dileo v. Horn , 15-684 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16), 189 So.3d 1189, 1198. The tort of conversion is committed when one wrongfully does any act of dominion over the property of another in denial of or inconsistent with the owner's rights.