Court Opinion

ID: 9659225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 21:35:38.807186+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:05.234531
License: Public Domain

*284FOSHEIM, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
This case was presented to the trial court on briefs and stipulated facts. Stipulated facts have the status of special findings and on review the question is whether they are sufficient to support the judgment. Farmers and Merchants Bank, Etc. v. Ksenych, 252 N.W.2d 220 (S.D.1977), citing Watsun v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co. of Ft. Wayne, Ind., 12 F.2d 422 (8th Cir.1926).
Whether the owner is trying to retain or the county is trying to change the character of the property for tax purposes is incidental. The central question is whether the property is actually real or personal as defined by statute.
The majority relies on City of Huron v. Jelgerhuis, 77 S.D. 600, 97 N.W.2d 314 (1959). That case is distinguishable. It involved readily detachable washing machines in a laundromat. In Jelgerhuis, 97 N.W.2d at 318, we noted:
The washing machines were similar to the washing machines used in homes .. . the only claimed annexation of these to the building was by an electrical cord with the usual outlet or plug-in similar to other electrical appliances, such as fans or toasters and hose connections similar to garden hose connections.
Appellee’s buildings and equipment are affixed to the land (SDCL 43-1-3(2): “Real or immovable property consists of ... That which is affixed to land”) and the fact that they are affixed by bolts does not take away their character as real property (SDCL 43-33-1: “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”). Here equipment is bolted to slabs of concrete 4 to 5 feet thick. Through and under this concrete are connecting underground pipes. It is difficult to visualize how structures or equipment could be more permanently affixed to the land. Based on these facts, judgment for appellee should not have been granted. Ksenych, supra.
I am hereby authorized to state that Justice Henderson joins in this dissent.