Court Opinion

ID: 9793165
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:43:49.521352+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:31.828394
License: Public Domain

THORNTON, J.,
dissenting.
This is a law action tried to the court without a jury. The court found from the evidence
" * * * that the modular home should be treated and considered as personal property.”
Whether or not an article annexed to the real property is a fixture is a question of fact to be determined upon the evidence in a particular case, and the question is determined not only by the manner in which the article is affixed to the realty, but also by the relationship of the parties to the controversy. Bell v. Bank of Perris, 52 Cal App 2d 66, 125 P2d 829, 833 (1942).
*888In a law action tried to the court the findings of the trial judge on disputed issues of fact are treated the same as a jury verdict. The appellate court considers the evidence and all favorable inferences that may be drawn from such evidence in a light most favorable to the prevailing party in the trial court. If those facts are supported by any substantial evidence, they will not be reviewed on appeal. Hassan v. Guyer, 271 Or 349, 352, 532 P2d 227 (1975); White v. Bello, 276 Or 931, 933, 556 P2d 1362 (1976). Here there is substantial evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s conclusion on the disputed issue whether the modular home was to be considered as personal property or real property.
I would therefore affirm.