Velmer v. Baraga Area Schools

I respectfully dissent. In Sequist v Fabiano, 274 Mich 643, 645-646; 265 NW 488 (1936), the items in question were a heating plant, electric light fixtures, and an awning on the front of the building. Explaining its reliance on Sequist, the Court of Appeals reasoned that those items "were intended to facilitate the use and occupation of the building, were complementary to the real property, and therefore became part of the freehold . . . .” Velmer v Baraga Area Schools, 157 Mich App 489, 497; 403 NW2d 171 (1987).

The milling machine used for classroom instruction in this case did not become…