Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Brown
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Plaintiff furnished material and performed labor in installing certain fixtures for a tenant in a new business block in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The court found the fixtures to be trade fixtures, placed *326upon the premises in such manner as to be removable without material injury to the building, and with the intention that the same shall be the property of the tenant, and that none of the fixtures were of such nature or so attached as to make the same a part of the building or real estate. The total value of all the items furnished was $2,147.48, and the sum of $514.92 had been paid and applied…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Nye v. KahlowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- White Enamel Refrigerator Co. v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Moody v. TschaboldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Holford v. CroweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Anker v. Chicago Great Western RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Jadwin v. KasalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Adjustment Service Bureau, Inc. v. BuelowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
- Barrett v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Ulstruck v. Home Assn.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Agricultural Credit Corp. v. Scandia American BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.