In the classic teen-age comedy, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, the father of Ferris's best friend,

Cameron, owned a 1961 Red 250 GT Ferrari convertible. Ferris conned Cameron into

Ferris taking the vehicle. Ferris drove it that day with his girlfriend and Cameron and

returned it to Cameron's home that day. Was Ferris's intentional act of taking the father's

convertible a trespass to chattels? If so, was it a dispossession or an intermeddling? Or was

it a conversion? What might Ferris, a clever young man, come up with as a defense to the

father's alternative claims of trespass to chattels and conversion and how valid would the

defense be?