¶1Privilege for the benefit of trade, holds only betwixt landlord and tenant; not betwixt third persons and the owner of the soil]: as is exemplified by Morgan v. Arthurs, 3 Watts 140, and Lemar v. Miles, 4 Watts 330. In the first of these, a steam engine ' set up by the owner to drive a saw mill, was held to be a part of the freehold and subject to a mechanic’s lien; while in the second, an *107engine set up by a lessee, to drive a salt works, was seized and sold as personal by his creditors. Here the engine was erected by the owner of the mill, and it was consequently a part of the freehold. Judgment affirmed.
7 Watts 106
Oves v. Ogelsby
Decided May 15, 1838
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1838-05-15
George Ogelsby against Abraham Oves. Amicable action and case stated in the nature of a special verdict. Samuel B. Sherer being the owner of a lot of ground which he used as a tannery, erected upon it a steam engine and fixtures, for the purpose of grinding bark and breaking hides in the course of his business. He failed; and Abraham Oves issued a fieri facias against him, and levied on the engine and fixtures.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1906
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1838-05-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →