MORGANTHAL v. STATE,15 A.D.2d 712[3d Dept 1962]
MAX MORGANTHAL, Respondent, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Claim No.
35817.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department.
Appeal from a judgment entered on a decision rendered after trial in the Court of Claims. This claim by a tenant for fixtures is governed byMarrarov.State of New York(15 A.D.2d 707). No claim was here made by the owner of the fee for fixtures; and this claim presents a good illustration of an instance in which plumbing and wiring, ordinarily treated as belonging to the owner of the fee, may be so much an integral part of the fixtures as to be treated as part of them, so that if the fixtures themselves are deemed so specially designed and adapted to the realty, the related wiring and plumbing are treated the same way. Claimant in this case conducted a market on the condemned premises. The proof is that the wiring and plumbing related to the fixtures, i.e., wiring was for "lighting fixtures on the top, the cases. Iceboxes. The wiring to the equipment machine, electric machine, slicing machine, chopping machine"; and "[P]lumbing connected to the sink, plumbing to the cases, plumbing to the icebox." If the fixtures themselves are compensable to the tenant, as we are holding in this group of cases, it seems clear that appurtenances such as wiring and plumbing which make the fixtures usable are as much a special part of them as the special doors or fittings necessary to install them. Such a view of this special kind of plumbing and wiring seems both logical and consistent withMatter of City of New York(339 Grand St. Corp.) (10 A.D.2d 498), which deals with custom-built fixtures; and with the rule to be implied from the language inMatter of City of New York(Whitlock Ave.) (278 N.Y. 276,282). Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent.
Present — Bergan, P.J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ. [
27 Misc.2d 731.]