Bliss v. Brucker, 6620.

• Decision Date: 24 March 1930
• Docket Number: No. 6620.,6620.
• Citation: 149 A. 595
• Parties: BLISS v. BRUCKER.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

149 A. 595

BLISS

v. BRUCKER.

No. 6620.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

March 24, 1930.

Exceptions from Superior Court, Washington County; Arthur P. Sumner, Judge.

Assumpsit by Anthony H. Bliss against Carrie J. Brucker. After a verdict for plaintiff, defendant's motion for a new trial was granted, and the cause was then transferred from the superior court on plaintiff's exception.

Exception overruled, and case remitted for a new trial.

Clarence E. Roche, of Westerly, for plaintiff.

Herbert W. Rathbun, of Westerly, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

This is an action of assumpsit to recover damages for the alleged wrongful eviction of the plaintiff, the lessee, by the defendant, the lessor, from a certain lot of land in South Kingstown. The case was tried by a jury, and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff. Defendant's motion for a new trial was granted by the trial justice. The case is in this court on the plaintiff's bill of exceptions; the sole exception being to the granting of a new trial.

June 23, 1924, plaintiff and defendant, by a written lease under seal executed by both parties, entered into an agreement for the lease of a lot owned by defendant near the Rhode Island State College in South Kingstown. The lease was for a period of five years from the 1st of August, 1924, with a privilege of renewal for three years. The rent for the first year was $75, with an advance for each year after the first of $25 a year, payable in advance on the 1st day of August of each year, with a proviso that, upon failure to pay within fifteen days after the rent was due in any year, the lessor was to be at liberty to declare the lease at an end and to take immediate possession of the premises. The lessee covenanted that any building erected on the property should become the property of the lessor at the expiration of the lessee's tenancy. The lease was executed in a lawyer's office in Westerly, and was read by both parties before execution. Plaintiff says that, within a few minutes after the execution of the lease and before the parties had separated, he told the agent of the lessor he was planning to build a coffee shop on the lot, that this would require so much money that he would not be able to pay the rent of $75 in advance, and that the agent agreed that the payment should be made at the end of each year. This is denied by the agent. Plaintiff built the shop, and for the first two years of his occupancy did a successful business therein. A fire occurred in the kitchen of the shop which required an addition to the building, which was made by the plaintiff with the knowledge of the lessor. In the third year plaintiff bought a house in the village, and, in order to pay therefor, used much of the money earned in the coffee shop. This last venture was ill-advised, and resulted in the plaintiff's becoming seriously involved financially. In January of the third year, the shop was closed. Plaintiff's wife, who worked with him in the shop, returned to the college to complete an unfinished course of study. For several months the premises were unoccupied and the rent for the year was unpaid. A deputy sheriff,...