Opinion ID: 1134201
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Did the Chancellor Err in the Award of Actual Damages?

Text: Both sides argue in this Court that the chancellor erred, either in awarding damages, or in awarding too small of an amount. We begin from the premise that a chancellor's finding of either evidentiary or ultimate facts will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence and not manifestly wrong. See Burch v. Hillman, 525 So.2d 396 (Miss. 1988); Conservatorship of Stevens v. Patrick, 523 So.2d 319, 323 (Miss. 1988); Clark v. Myrick, 523 So.2d 79, 80-81 (Miss. 1988); Leard v. Breland, 514 So.2d 778 (Miss. 1987); Estate of Johnson v. Adkins, 513 So.2d 922 (Miss. 1987); Ford v. Lamar Life Ins. Co., 513 So.2d 880 (Miss. 1987); Rice Researchers, Inc. v. Hiter, 512 So.2d 1259 (Miss. 1987); Gulf National Bank v. Sturtevant, 511 So.2d 936 (Miss. 1987); Brown v. Williams, 504 So.2d 1188 (Miss. 1987); Harkins v. Fletcher, 499 So.2d 773 (Miss. 1986); Dillon v. Dillon, 498 So.2d 328 (Miss. 1986). In Mississippi, the question of whether a chattel has become a fixture to the real estate is one of intent. Love v. Union Central Life Ins. Co., 168 Miss. 408, 150 So. 794 (1933); Perkins, Livingston & Post v. Swank, 43 Miss. 349, 362 (1870); Weathersby v. Sleeper, 42 Miss. 732, 8 Miss (7 Howard) 421 (1843). This is a question of fact. Ziller v. Atkins Motel Co., 244 So.2d 409 (Miss. 1971). The chancellor found that ICG's intent gleaned from the documents before him was that the railroad bridge timbers were to be fixtures that could be removed from the right-of-way prior to September 27, 1983. If not removed by the expressed expiration date, the timbers passed to Bondafoam. We cannot hold this finding to be unsupported or manifestly wrong. Likewise, we cannot find manifestly incorrect the chancellor's division of the timbers. Before the chancellor was evidence of the number and worth of timbers and testimony that roughly only one-third of the timbers stacked at the crossing actually came from Bondafoam's property. We affirm so much of the judgment as gave Bondafoam timbers from its right-of-way, while awarding partial damages to Cook on the basis of unjust enrichment.