Bryan v. . Lawrence
Supreme Court of North Carolina
AoxioN of teespass, guare clausum fregit, tried before Ellis, J., at the last Spring Term of Edgecombe Superior Court The plaintiff purchased of the defendant his farm in Edge-combe county, by deed in fee, and went into possession of the same. Upon the premises, thus conveyed, there were two stills, used for distilling brandy, incased in brick and mortar work, and covered with a shelter, which could not be removed without pulling down the work.
Read the full summary
AoxioN of teespass, guare clausum fregit, tried before Ellis, J., at the last Spring Term of Edgecombe Superior Court The plaintiff purchased of the defendant his farm in Edge-combe county, by deed in fee, and went into possession of the same. Upon the premises, thus conveyed, there were two stills, used for distilling brandy, incased in brick and mortar work, and covered with a shelter, which could not be removed without pulling down the work. There was also on the land a large kettle, put up in the same manner, which was used for cooking food for hogs. There was about 800 feet of plank…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
The question, of what are, or are not fixtures, as between the vendor and vendee of real estate, has not often been the subject of judicial decision in this State, and tlm counsel for the plaintiff has been unable to.refer us to any casein our reports upon the subject. He has, however, called our attention to two cases in. the English, which throw much light upon the question which wc are now called upon to decide. The first is the case of Colegrave v. Dias Santos, 2 Barn. and Cres. 76, (9 Eng. C. L. Report 30,) where a house was sold in which were grates, kitchen ranges, closets, shelves,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. Martin.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Stephens v. CarterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Jenkins v. . FloydSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Fleishel v. JessupSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956