Rudneck

Midland O. F. Co., Ltd. v. Rudneck

Good Law
188 Cal. 265·1922 Cal. LEXIS 419·204 P. 1074
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 1922L. A. No. 7031.California1,837 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

The defendants appeal from the judgment. The complaint states a cause of action to recover damages for the taking and conversion of plaintiff’s personal property by the defendants. It consisted of boilers and other machinery and tools comprising an oil-well drilling “rig,” together with the timber and other materials of a derrick belonging thereto.

The defendants claim that at the time of the taking and conversion they, and not the plaintiff, were the owners of the property.

The court found that the plaintiff was the owner of the property: that the defendants, in February, 1918, wrongfully took the same and converted it to their own use, to the damage of the plaintiff in the sum of eighteen hundred dollars, for which sum it gave judgment for the plaintiff.

The main controversy arises upon the question whether the boilers and derrick were fixtures and as such a part of the realty at the time one Enwright, from whom the defendants bought the property, made his entry upon the land as a homesteader under the laws for the disposal of public lands of the United States, or was personal property.

Enwright entered upon the land on October 25, 1915, and on June 24, 1916, he duly made…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.