Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)

Citation: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Parent Document: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2020-09-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4784084/aljabban-v-fontana-indoor-swap-... ↗

Full Text

1,673 chars

11 On appeal, Aljabban makes no argument challenging the admission of
the parol evidence.
23
Because the list in paragraph 4 is not exhaustive, it is reasonable to
infer, as the trial court did, that by using the term “permanent fixture,”
paragraph 4 intended to incorporate the Civil Code provisions and case law
that defines the circumstances under which something becomes a permanent
fixture of real property. We accordingly turn to that body of law to determine
whether the Items were permanent fixtures that could not be removed when
Aljabban and Carrasco vacated space H-2.
With respect to improvements to real property, Civil Code section 660
defines a fixture as follows: “A thing is deemed to be affixed to land when it
is . . . permanently attached to what is thus permanent, as by means of
cement, plaster, nails, bolts, or screws.” (Civ. Code, § 660.) “ ‘The California
cases state a general proposition that the landlord will become owner of
‘fixtures’ affixed by the tenant to the land in the absence of countervailing
circumstances. Civil Code section 1013 provides the statutory statement of
the rule: “When a person affixes his property to the land of another . . . the
thing affixed . . . belongs to the owner of the land” unless (1) there is an
agreement between the parties permitting the annexer to “remove” the thing
affixed, or (2) the case comes within Civil Code Section 1019, concerning the
“removability” of (trade) “fixtures” by tenants.’ . . . Such ‘fixtures removable
by tenants’ are called ‘trade fixtures.’ ” (Goldie v. Bauchet Properties (1975) 15 Cal.3d 307, 313, citation omitted.)12

Other Sections in This Document (85)

Full Text