Casino Fixtures

LeasePartners Corp. v. The Robert L. Brooks Trust, No. 25946, 1997 WL 398930 (Nev. July 15, 1997). FIXTURES – The Brooks Trust owned the Royal Hotel and Casino; the Danzig Corp. leased the hotel and casino from the Trust. Danzig leased large signs from LeasePartners which were attached to the casino — the large glittery signs common to casinos. Danzig eventually defaulted on its lease with the Trust, and Danzig's lease for the hotel/casino was terminated. When LeasePartners was not paid rent for its signs, it sued the Trust. The Trust argued it had entered into no agreement with LeasePartners, and that the signs were fixtures (part of the real estate). The question here for the Nevada Supreme Court was whether the signs were "fixtures". If the signs were fixtures, the Trust would not be liable for rent.

Nevada uses three factors to determine whether a thing is a fixture. First, an annexation test determines whether a thing is joined to the real property. Second, an adaption test tells whether an object is adapted specifically to the use for which the real property is devoted. Lastly, and most importantly, is the intention of the parties at the time the items were installed. This was particularly difficult here, where the parties had no lease themselves (Danzig signed leases with each). The Nevada Supreme Court remanded this case so that the trial could consider the intentions of the parties.