Dudley v. Hurst
| Decision Date | 16 March 1887 |
| Citation | 8 A. 901,67 Md. 44 |
| Parties | DUDLEY AND OTHERS v. HURST AND OTHERS. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Prince George's county. In equity.
C C. Magruder and Frank H. Stockett, for appellants.
Joseph K. Roberts and William Stanley, for appellees.
Thomas Clagett, of Westen, was the owner in fee of a large tract of land lying in Prince George's county, Maryland containing about 600 acres. Upon this farm he resided, and had established a canning factory for the purpose of canning fruits, vegetables, and corn, principally the latter. In July, 1883, he mortgaged this farm to William B. Bowie. This mortgage is not in the record, but we have been furnished with a certified copy taken by the proper officer from the records of Prince George's county. This mortgage, after describing and granting the land in the usual form, goes on to say: "Together with the buildings and improvements thereupon, and the rights, roadways, waters, privileges appurtenances, and advantages thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining." This farm was sold under the mortgage, and purchased by the complainants in April, 1885. They took possession of the farm, and rented it for the residue of the year 1885, and their tenants continued the canning business. In March, 1885, the mortgagor, Clagett, executed a chattel mortgage of the machinery in the canning factory to the respondents, and in September, 1885, the respondents were about to sell the machinery under the power of sale contained in their mortgage, when the complainants obtained a preliminary injunction against such sale, upon the ground that the machinery in the canning factory were fixtures, and passed to them under their mortgage of July, 1883. A good deal of testimony was then taken, and upon the final hearing the court below dissolved the injunction, and dismissed the bill, and the complainants appealed to this court.
It will be seen from this brief statement of the case that the important question in the case is whether the machinery in the canning factory passed to the complainants under the mortgage of July, 1883, or, in other words, whether such machinery, as between the mortgagor and mortgagee, were or were not fixtures. The learned judge who tried the case below did not decide that question, but dismissed the bill upon the ground that complainants had an adequate remedy at law, even if this machinery did belong to them. But if the machinery had really become, by annexation, actual or constructive, a part of the freehold, we entertain no doubt of the power of a court of equity to restrain and prevent its attempted severance. But, if the machinery still retained its distinctive character as a personal chattel, it did not in fact belong to the complainants, but to the respondents, and then the complainants had no right to ask the interposition of a court of equity in their behalf, and the bill must be dismissed. The character of the machinery is, then, the only question of importance in the case.
A learned author of a work on fixtures (Ewell) says there is perhaps no other legal term which has been used in so many differing and often contradictory significations as the term "fixtures." The term "fixture" is generally used in reference to some originally personal chattel which has been actually or constructively affixed either to the soil itself, or some structure legally a part of such soil. The tests by which a fixture is determined are generally these: (1) Annexation to the realty, either actual or constructive; (2) adaptation to the use of that part of the realty with which it is connected; (3) the intention of the party making the annexation to make the article a permanent accession to the freehold,--this intention being inferred from the nature of the article annexed, the situation of the party making the annexation, the mode of annexation, and the purpose for which it was annexed. Ewell, Fixt.; Tyler, Fixt.; Jones, Mortg. Of these tests the most important is the question of intention. This is clearly shown by the fact that the law is very different between landlord and tenant and mortgagor and mortgagee, or, what is the same, vendor and vendee; many things being held as fixtures between vendor and vendee which do not lose their character of personal chattels when the question is between landlord and tenant. This case is to be governed by the law as it exists between mortgagor and mortgagee, or vendor and vendee, and not as it is between landlord and tenant.
We have quoted a portion of the mortgage under which the appellants claim, not for the purpose of showing that the machinery in question was specifically included in its terms, but for the purpose of showing that nothing that was actually or constructively affixed to the freehold was excepted from its operation. The mortgage is broad enough, it will be seen, to cover everything that the law would, as between mortgagor and mortgagee, determine to be a fixture; and the question is resolved into whether this machinery is a "fixture." The business of canning is a comparatively new one, and the owner of this farm, Mr Clagett, having commenced this business in 1882 as an experiment, and being satisfied with the results, determined to make it his permanent business. The main part of the machinery consisted of a boiler, which was placed upon a brick foundation in a boiler-house built for that purpose. This building is attached to the main building both with mortices and spikes. In order to remove the boiler, which weighs about 10,000 pounds, it would be necessary to pull down the whole boiler-house, including the sills. There is connected with the boiler, by steam-pipes, a steam-pump fixed on a hard-wood foundation, strengthened by heavy timbers driven into the ground, and the foundation is spiked to these timbers. Running from the boiler is a large steam-pipe, which is carried into the main building, and made fast to the ceiling above. From this pipe there are several pipes which pass down the side of the house to the ground, and two feet below the floor. This piping connects with the kettles, scalder, etc., and furnishes the steam for them. The kettles rest upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial