In California, who owns buildings or soil left on a leased farm after abandonment?
<p>If a tenant builds a building on leased land, and purchases soil deposited on the land, whose is it after the tenant abandons the property? For the purposes of this question, assume the lease did not include any provisions addressing this matter.</p>

<p>What statues or precedents are relevant here?</p>

<h2>Is the soil a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixture_(property_law)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">fixture</a> or a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property" rel="nofollow noreferrer">chattel</a>?</h2>

<p>Fixtures revert to the landlord; chattels remain the property of the tenant with the landlord as bailee.</p>

<p>Soil could be either - if it was brought onto the site with the intention that it become a permanent part of the landscaping then its a fixture; if its purpose was to be on-sold or incorporated into pot-plants then its a chattel.</p>

rental-property ownership lease business-lease agriculture