
    ABRAHAM PINKUS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, v. FRITZ SIEGEL ET UX., DEFENDANTS.
    Submilted February term, 1924
    Decided May 26, 1924.
    Malicious Taking — Defense That Goods Taken Were Not Fixtures but Chattels.
    On rule, &c.
    Before Gviimeuk, Chief Justice, and Justices Mtntcrx and Black.
    For the plaintiffs, Stamler, Stamler & Koexller.
    
    For the defendant, Abe J. David.
    
   Per Curiam.

This suit was brought to recover damages for a malicious taking and carrying away certain goods from premises Nos. 4(30' and 462 Elizabeth avenue, Elizabeth, New Jersey. The defendants had sold to the plaintiffs the. premises for $24,000 under a written contract dated October 26th, 1922, which contained this clause over which the dispute arose, viz.: “Eront and back bar fixtures” and all other fixtures in buildings to remain except piano "and pictures on the wall.” The trial resulted in a verdict for the plaintiffs for' $2,500. The defense was the property in question was not fixtures, but chattels, and not within the terms of the contract, and which were-not agreed to be sold. If this is not so, then it so argued, the value of the goods taken away by the defendant Siegel was not $2,500. We think the case was fairly tried and the jury was justified in finding the verdict that was reached. The rule to show cause is discharged.  