McNally

McNally v. Connolly

Good Law
1885 Cal. LEXIS 884·2 Cal. Unrep. 621·9 P. 169
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 29, 1885No. 8864California954 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Searls, J.

This is an action to recover possession of certain personal property, if possession can be had, and, if not, *622 the value thereof. Defendant had judgment, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, plaintiffs appeal. In 1876, Owen Connolly, the defendant, took a lease of a lot of land on Fourth street, near Berry, in the city of San Francisco, for a term which was to expire January 1, 1881. There was a brick building upon the lot, but which did not cover the whole of it. Connolly paid his rent in full for the term, formed a copartnership with Charles D. Wheat, and, as such copartners, under the firm name of Connolly & Wheat, they proceeded to place upon said lot of land an engine, boiler and machinery for a flouring-mill, which machinery is the subject matter of the controversy in this action. The engine and boiler were erected in a wooden building adjoining the brick structure, and the motive power was communicated therefrom to the machinery by means of a shaft, or shafts, extending into and through the brick structure. The foundation for the engine and boiler was made by sinking timbers in the ground from six inches to two feet, upon which a brick foundation was built,…

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.