Beller v. Robinson
| Decision Date | 11 April 1883 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | BELLER v. ROBINSON and another. |
A year's lease gave the privilege of an extension for three years, if written notice of the intention to continue should be given 30 days before the expiration of the year. Held that the estate created by the lease terminated at the end of the year, if the notice was not given as stipulated; and that an additional estate for three years could not, under Comp.Laws, � 4694, be created by any oral agreements or any waiver of the stipulation, actual or constructive, even though the tenant held over. Delashman v. Berry, 20 Mich. 292, distinguished, in that the option allowed in that case did not have to be expressed in writing.
Error to Wayne.
George Gartner, for plaintiff.
Geo. H Lothrop, for defendants and appellants.
Plaintiff on October 24, 1877, leased to defendants certain rooms in a brick store in the city of Detroit "for the term of one year, with the privilege of three years thereafter." The lease contained a provision that "in case said second parties choose to avail themselves of the privilege of extending this lease for three years after the expiration of the term of one year herein provided for, they must give notice, and hereby agree to give notice in writing to said first party, of such intention, 30 days before the expira- of this term."
Defendants occupied the rooms for one year, and then, without giving the notice in writing provided for by the lease, remained for two years longer, paying the rent stipulated in the lease. They then left and declined to pay further rent. Plaintiff, giving evidence on his own behalf, testified that defendants, before the first year had expired, notified him orally that they exercised their option to continue there for the additional three years, and that their remaining there afterwards was in pursuance of that notice.
Defendants denied this, and testified that when the first year was up they orally bargained with the plaintiff for the occupancy of the rooms for a year, and that this bargain was renewed for another year when the first had expired. The circuit judge instructed the jury that if defendants notified the plaintiff orally of their purpose to retain the rooms for the three years after the first, and if they continued in possession after the first year expired, and under their notice, the lease was thereby extended for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Signal Management Corp. v. Lamb
...is not in writing. First Bank relies on Brookhill Management Corp. v. Shah, 197 Ga.App. 305, 398 S.E.2d 290 (1990), Beller v. Robinson, 50 Mich. 264, 15 N.W. 448 (1883), and Ochoa v. Estate of Sarria, 97 A.D.2d 538, 468 N.Y.S.2d 44 (1983), for the proposition that an option contained in a l......
-
Wolf v. Tastee Freez Corp. of America
...any way analogous to the instant situation, and clearly violates the statute of frauds. Plaintiffs quote extensively from Beller v. Robinson, 50 Mich. 264, 15 N.W. 448, which does support their position. This seems to be a very minority rule, and if the case of Darling v. Hoban, 53 Mich. 59......
-
Khourie Bros. v. Jonakin
...them is the case of Darling v. Hoban, 53 Mich. 599, 19 N. W. 545, which if it does not in effect overrule the case of Beller v. Robinson, 50 Mich. 264, 15 N.W. 448, relied on by appellee in this case, seriously shakes the doctrine of the latter named From the foregoing it follows that the f......
-
Gerhart Realty Company v. Brecht
...In one case cited by appellant's counsel the renewal was held not to have occurred because the statute of frauds stood in the way. Beller v. Robinson, supra. We confronted with no such difficulty. The general principle underlying the decisions is very well stated in Cooper v. Joy, supra, wh......