Vail v. Weaver
This text of 19 A. 138 (Vail v. Weaver) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The principal question in this case was, whether the machinery and fixtures of the electric plant, which were placed in the tack-works, were placed there permanently or not. If they were temporary fixtures, placed there for a temporary purpose, their sale under the writ of fieri facias passed a good title. Mere physical annexation is no longer the rule. It is a question of intention. The intention to annex, whether rightfully or wrongfully, is the legal criterion: Hill v. Sewald, 53 Pa. 271; Seeger v. Pettit, 77 Pa. 437; Morris’s App., 88 Pa. 368. This question was submitted to the jury by the learned court below under adequate instructions, and their verdict ends the case.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 A. 138, 132 Pa. 363, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vail-v-weaver-pa-1890.