Legal Opinion

Jenkins v. . Floyd

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 24, 1930PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

Tbe sole question presented in tbis action: Tbe owner of land placed in buildings on bis land (1) a cotton gin, used for tbe purpose of ginning cotton for bimself and tbe public; (2) a corn mill, used for tbe purpose of grinding corn for bimself and tbe public, botb run by tbe same boiler. Are tbey fixtures, and do tbey become part of tbe realty? We tbink so as between vendor and vendee.

It was in evidence that tbe gin and corn mill were in separate buildings, but run by tbe same boiler. Tbe machinery was installed by J. J. Baird for tbe purpose not only of ginning bis own cotton and grinding…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Potter v. . CromwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Bond v. . CokeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
  3. Horne v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  4. Foote v. . GoochSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  5. Deal v. . PalmerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Little v. National Service Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  2. State v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Danville Holding Corp. v. ClementSupreme Court of Virginia · 1941
  4. Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. LowerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  5. United States v. GaskinsDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API