Skip to main content
· 7/1/1858

Sands v. Pfeiffer

Citations

  • 10 Cal. 258

Syllabus

<p>The general rule of law is, that whatever is once annexed to the freehold becomes parcel thereof, and passes with the conveyance of the estate. Though the rule has been in modern times greatly relaxed, as between landlord and tenant, in relation to the things affixed for the purposes of trade and manufacturo, and also in relation to articles put up for ornament or domestic use, it remains in full forco as between vendor and vendee.</p> <p>As a general thing, a tenant may remove what he has added, when he can do so without injury to the estate, unless it has become, by its manner of addition, an integral part of the original premises; but as against a vendor, all fixtures pass to his vendee, even though erected for the purposes of trade and manufacture, unless specially reserved in the conveyance.</p> <p>The strict rule which applies at common law between heir and executor, applies equally between vendor and vendee, and between mortgagor and mortgagee.</p> <p>The engine and boilers, etc., used in a flour-mill, being permanently fastened to the mill, which had its foundation in the groufid : Held, to be fixtures covered by a mortgage upon the premises, though put up after the execution of the mortgage, and held to pass to the purchaser of the mortgaged premises under a decree of foreclosure.</p> <p>A mortgagor, after a sale of the mortgaged premises under a decree in a suit to foreclose the mortgage, has the right to the use and possession of the mortgaged premises until the execution of the sheriff’s deed, but he possesses no right to despoil the property of its fixtures. The deed of the sheriff takes effect by relation at the date of the mortgage, and passes fixtures subsequently annexed by the mortgagor.</p> <p>By the wrongful severance from the premises, the fixtures become personal property, for the recovery of which an action of replevin will lie by the purchaser after he obtains the sheriffs deed.</p> <p>The remedy by injunction to restrain the removal of fi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • this Court lacked jurisdiction to hear a fast writ of exception from an order dissolving or modifying a temporary restraining order even though the issue was decided after a hearing
  • this Court lacked jurisdiction to hear a fast writ of exception from an order dissolving or modifying a temporary restraining order even though the issue was decided after a hearing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Field

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.