Legal Opinion

Home Bond & Mortgage Corp. v. Alabama Utilities Service Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 25, 1932No. 3 Div. 22PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

The suit is in detinue to recover one “Bryant” gas furnace with thermostat. The suit was originally against one Sharrer who filed a disclaimer and suggested the Home Bond & Mortgage Corporation, from whom he had leased the house in which the furnace had ■been placed, as the interested party,' and said corporation was thereupon duly substituted as defendant. The cause was tried before the court without a jury and on oral proof, resulting in a judgment for the plaintiff, from which defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The defendant first insists the furnace was a fixture and a part of the realty; a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Figh v. TaberSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
  2. Street v. TreadwellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
  3. Nelson v. HowisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  4. Daniel Bros. v. Jordan & SonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
  5. Moore v. Monroe Refrigerator Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1900

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Williams v. Dan River Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1971
  2. Roberts v. GraysonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  3. Webb v. WebbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  4. Mars, Inc. v. ChubriloWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API