Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Jensen
Citation | 9 N.W.2d 140,69 S.D. 225 |
Decision Date | 07 April 1943 |
Docket Number | 8579 |
Parties | METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO., Respondent, v. J. B. JENSEN, Appellant. |
Court | Supreme Court of South Dakota |
Plaintiff brought this action to enjoin the removal and disposal of the storm windows, screens, sink, bathtub and the electric motor alleged to be a part of the realty described in the complaint. The cause was tried to the court without a jury and resulted in a judgment for plaintiff granting an injunction. From this judgment, defendants have appealed.
Defendants J. B. Jensen and his sister Agnes Jensen were the owners of the premises described in the complaint. Plaintiff acquired title to the premises by foreclosure of a mortgage given by defendants. The court found
Defendants contend that the storm windows and the other properties in controversy were not affixed to the realty by one or more of the means of affixation mentioned in SDC 51.0104 and are not an integral part of the realty. The section referred to reads: “A thing is deemed to be affixed to land when it is attached to it by roots, as in the case of trees, vines, or shrubs; or imbedded in it, as in the case of walls; or permanently resting upon it, as in the case of buildings; or permanently attached to what is thus permanent, as by means of cement, plaster, nails, bolts, or screws.”
The Supreme Court of California construing the same section in the statutes of that state held that it is “simply a rule for general guidance, concerning itself more with ultimate than with probative facts.” Gosliner v. Briones et al., 187 Cal. 557, 204 P 19, 20. The contention that an article cannot become an appurtenance to realty without physical attachment or annexation does not permit of serious consideration. As was said by the Supreme Court of California in San Diego Trust & Savings Bank et al. v. San Diego County et al., 16 Cal2d 142, 105 P2d 94, 98, 133 ALR 416: In Farrar v. Stackpole, 6 Greenl. 154, 6 Me. 154, 19 Am. Dec. 201, it was said: “Windows, doors, and window shutters are often hung, but not fastened, to a building, yet they are properly part of the real estate, and pass with it; because it is not the mere fixing or fastening which is...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Granite Buick GMC, Inc. v. Ray
... ... Tellinghuisen, Michael V. Wheeler, DeMersseman, Jensen, Tellinghuisen, Stanton & Huffman, LLP, Rapid City, South Dakota, ... See Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Jensen, 69 S.D. 225, 230, 9 N.W.2d 140, 142 (1943) ( ... ...
-
Max Drill, Inc. v. United States
... ... the contract by the parties thereto for a substantial portion of its life ... 427 F.2d 1241 Plaintiff, in support of its ... 120, 123-124, 55 S.Ct. 362, 79 L.Ed. 798 (1935); Miami Metropolitan" Bldg. Corp. v. United States, 180 Ct.Cl. 503, 514 (1967) ... \xC2" ... Sanborn, 106 Me. 159, 76 A. 263 (1910); Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Jensen, 69 S.D. 225, 9 N.W.2d 140 (1943). Since a fixture is ... ...
-
Dakota Harvestore Systems, Inc. v. South Dakota Dept. of Revenue
... ... Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Jensen, 69 S.D. 225, 9 N.W.2d 140 (1943). Among the ... ...
-
Killian v. Hubbard
... ... views thus expressed have been followed by this court ... Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Jensen, S.D., 9 N.W.2d 140; ... Arlt v. Langley, 56 S.D ... ...