Bergeron v. Aero Sales, Inc 134 P.3d 964 (Ore. App. 2006) Parties: Plaintiff – Bergeron – Person who had placed his jet fuel on Praegitzer’s property. Defendant –Curtwright – Peron who bought the hangar from Praegitzer Facts: Kasper bought jet fuel and placed it in a tank that Praegitzer owned which was located on land that Praegitzer owned. Praegitzer later sold the hangar and the tank to Cartwright. Kasper tries to get his jet fuel back when he learns that the hangar and tank were sold to Cartwright, but Cartwright refused to allow Kasper to remove the fuel. Cartwright claims that he purchased the fuel when he purchased the hangar and the tank from Praegitzer. Procedural Posture: Praegitzer sued from trespass against Kasper for using Praegitzer’s hangar without permission. Kasper filed a counterclaim against Praegitzer for conversion of the jet fuel. Kasper filed a third party claim against Cartwright for the conversion of the jet fuel. Curtwright filed a cross claim against Praegitzer for indemnity and breach of contract. The trial court granted the motions of Praegitzer and Curtwright and denied Kasper’s claims. Kasper appeals. Issue: Did Kasper have a valid claim for conversion of his jet fuel by Curtwright? Holding: Yes. Ruling: The trial court erred in granting Curtwright’s motion for summary judgment and denying Kasper’s claim for summary judgment. Legal Reasoning: The court reasoned that Praegitzer didn’t have voidable title to the jet fuel which was stored at his hangar. There was no evidence presented that shoed that Kasper tried to sell or transfer his interest in the jet fuel to Praegitzer. Kasper didn’t abandon his fuel and he didn’t have any intention of giving up ownership of it. Kasper maintained ownership of the fuel even though it was stored on someone else’s tank and on someone else’s property. Therefore the court reasoned that Kasper had better title to the jet fuel than Curtwright.