L executed a ninety-nine year lease of certain Chicago real estate to T, who agreed to erect thereon, as security for the payment of rent, a building of a certain description and to keep the premises free and clear of all liens arising from the construction of the building. The lease was recorded, and the building was erected with funds procured by the sale of bonds secured by a trust mortgage of the leasehold to E. When completed the building contained, as required by city ordinance, an automatic water sprinkling system, purchased by T from V under a conditional sale agreement by the terms of which the system was to remain the personal property of V until payment of the purchase money. At the time of the sale V had actual notice of the terms of the leasehold agreement. T defaulted on his obligations to L, V, and E, and the latter began foreclosure proceedings with L and V joined as defendants. L filed an intervening petition and a cross bill in which he alleged that the leasehold had been forfeited and prayed that he be declared entitled to the property free and clear. From a decree for L, as prayed, V appealed. Held, decree reversed with instructions that V should have judgment against L for the conversion of the sprinklers. National Bank of Republic v. Wells-Jackson Corp., 358 Ill. 356, 193 N. E. 215 (1934).
FIXTURES - EFFECT OF FORFEITURE OF LEASE ON RIGHTS OF CONDITIONAL VENDOR WHO SOLD CHATTELS TO LESSEE UNDER TITLE RETENTION AGREEMENT,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol34/iss3/18