Legal Opinion

King v. Rice

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 8, 2008No. 60461-9-IPublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLeach, J.

¶1 In this action for damages claimed for the destruction of a modular living unit situated on recently purchased property, the parties dispute whether the structure was real property conveyed to the buyers with the underlying real estate, or whether it remained the personal property of the seller. An object located on real estate is real property if it is annexed to the realty, its use or purpose is applied to or integrated with the use of the realty, and the annexing party intended it to be a permanent addition to the freehold. Because we cannot say as a matter of law that the structure was…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Berg v. HudesmanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Hearst Communications v. Seattle Times Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Hearst Communications, Inc. v. Seattle Times Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Alejandre v. BullWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Emrich v. ConnellWashington Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  2. State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  3. Renfro v. KaurCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
  4. Borish v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
  5. Hawkins v. DielCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011

9 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