Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Mauro

I cannot agree that the bowling equipment is personalty. Under the weight of the authorities cited below, the equipment constitutes fixtures as a matter of law, and thus it is covered under the fixture clause of the 1964 mortgage. Furthermore, parol evidence to the contrary is inadmissible, and title thus passed to Merritt-Chapman upon foreclosure.

I

Turning first to the issue of whether the equipment constitutes personalty or fixtures, the majority correctly acknowledges that it is the intention of the parties, objectively manifested as of the date when the personalty is attached to the…