THOMAS MEENA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
S. DROUSIOTIS, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the services rendered did not fall under the professional engineer licensing statute, and the machinery installed was considered personal property (trade fixtures) removable without damage to the realty.
The lien claimant performed services and installed machinery. The appeal concerns whether the claimant needed a professional engineer's license and wh…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Real Property Vs. Personal Property cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal brings for review final decree foreclosing a lien existing under the provisions of Section 3503, R. G. S, 5364 C. G. L.
Appellant poses two questions for our consideration, as follows:
1. “Can a person come into the State of Florida and practice the profession of a chemical engineer without having first received a certificate so to do from the State Board of Engineering Examiners, and maintain an action in the courts of the State of Florida to recover money for services rendered?”
*1702. “Are trade fixtures placed in a building erected for a particular purpose, and which fixtures are essential to the carrying out of the purpose for which the building was erected, a part of the real estate, and as such real property, or are they personal property?”
The answer to the first question is that the work and services performed by the lien claimant did not come within the purview of the provisions of Sections 2273 R. G. S., 3619 C. G. L., et seq., applying to professional engineers.
As to the second question, the record discloses substantial evidence to establish the fact that the machinery on which lien was claimed was so installed as to be removable without damage to other machinery or to the building. So in this regard the enunciations in the cases of Commercial Finance Co. v. Brooksville Hotel Co., 98 Fla. 410, 123 Sou. 814, and in Inter-State & Banking Co. v. Warren, 69 Fed. (2nd) 368, are applicable.
The mere fact that to remove the machinery would prevent the successful operation of defendant’s business constitutes no defense, nor .does such result constitute a damage to the realty. See Wheat v. Otis Elevator Co., 23 Fed. (2nd) 152.
An examination of the entire record discloses no reversible error and the decree is affirmed.
So ordered.
Affirmed.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield, and Adams, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Walter "Skip" Wetjen v. Williamson, 196 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)…23 So. 814, 64 A.L.R. 1219 (1929). . Greenwald v. Graham, 100 Fla. 818, 130 So. 608 (1930), and Brown v. Marzyck, 19 Fla. 840 (1883). . 17 Fla.Jur., Fixtures, § 18; 22 Am.Jur., Fixtures, § 12. . 22 Am.Jur., Fixtures, § 61. . Meena v. Drousiotis, 146 Fla. 168, 200 So. 362 (1941).…
-
Sweeting v. Foy Hammons, Jr., 521 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ced upon land by a tenant for purposes of his trade were to be regarded as personalty rather than realty and might be removed by the tenant at the end of his term, provided that removal did not substantially injure the freehold. Meena v. Drousiotis, 146 Fla. 168, 200 So. 362 (1941). Based upon principles of public policy, the trade fixture rule was designed to encourage trade and manufacturing, Wetjen v. Williamson, 196 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967), having its foundation in the interest which society has…
-
White v. Cnty. Mortgagee Corp. & Pauline Muravchick, 211 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…in the premises involved were subject to being removed without damage to the premises, and therefore retained its character as a chattel. Commercial Finance Co. v. Brooksville Hotel Co., 98 Fla. 410, 123 So. 814, 64 A.L.R. 1219; Meena v. Drousiotis, 146 Fla. 168, 200 So. 362; Maas Brothers, Inc. v. Guaranty Federal Savings and Loan Association, Fla.App.1963, 157 So. 2d 528. The record on appeal in the instant case discloses that the appellants [as conditional vendors] sold an elevator system to a conditiona…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Commercial Fin. Co. v. Brooksville Hotel Co., 98 Fla. 410 (Fla. 1929)