Legal Opinion

Phillips-Michigan Co. v. Field Body Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1922No. Docket No. 83PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

On motion the bill to foreclose a mechanic’s lien was dismissed. Plaintiff has appealed. The bill alleges that under a written contract between the parties plaintiff equipped a certain factory building of defendant with a system of automatic fire sprinklers.

We quote from the contract:

“That the said system is not, and shall not, become a fixture, but shall be, and remain personal property, and the title and right of possession thereto, shall remain in the said Phillips-Michigan Company until fully paid for. Said second party expressly agrees that it acquires no title to such system until it…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Young v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Atkinson v. JapinkMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Case Manuf'g Co. v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Tennessee · 1889
  4. Perkins v. Golden GirlMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Dawson v. Chippewa Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Floyd v. RamboSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  2. Peter Schuttler Co. v. GuntherMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Contractors Equipment Co. v. ReasnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Thomas Spacing Machine Co. v. Security Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1923
  5. In re Harmony Theatre Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1924

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API