Greene v. Leeper
| Decision Date | 14 December 1951 |
| Citation | 193 Tenn. 153,245 S.W.2d 181,29 Beeler 153 |
| Parties | , 193 Tenn. 153 GREENE v. LEEPER. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Dodson & Dodson, Kingsport, for complaint.
John R. Todd, Jr., Wm. S. Todd, Kingsport, for defendant.
This suit was brought under the declaratory judgment statute, Code § 8835 et seq., by the complainant, David Greene, against the defendant, Edd Leeper, to determine the rights of the complainant and those of the defendant under a lease contract dated January 1, 1946 whereby property now owned by the defendant and located in the city of Kingsport was leased for a period of five years. The Chancellor held that the provision for renewal was too indefinite and dismissed the bill of the complainant Greene.
The contest is over the right of Greene to demand a five year renewal under the lease contract.
The contract contained the following provision: 'The parties of the second part have a right to renew this lease for another term of five years at a rental to be agreed on according to business conditions at that time.'
The only question involved in this cause is whether or not the provisions of the contract dated January 1, 1946 are valid so as to be extended to permit occupancy of Leeper's property for a five year period under the provision calling for a rental to be agreed on according to business conditions at that time. The Chancellor was of opinion, hearing the case on demurrer, that the contract was too vague, indefinite and uncertain to be enforced.
A renewal provision is a lease providing for an additional term of five years and leaving the amount of rent to be agreed on according to business conditions at the time of renewal is valid and enforceable. Stone v. Martin, 185 Tenn. 369, 206 S.W.2d 388, 389.
In the case cited, the lease contract provided 'at the monthly value of like property at time of expiration.'
We think the equitable rule is that the primary and essential agreement is that renewal of the original lease and stipulations as to the amount of rent and methods of determining that amount are ancillary to the primary contract and matters of form rather than substance.
In Stone v. Martin, supra, this Court said: 'Read estate experts, with a knowledge of local conditions, would have no difficulty in fixing the rental value under those directions.'
No doubt a part of the consideration of the original lease was the provision therein contained as to renewal. In the present case, complaint had an established business and his five year contract was about to run out, and complying with the renewal provision, he notified the property owner of his desire to exercise his option. We see no reason why, in fairness...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Edgewater Enterprises, Inc. v. Holler
...148 Ohio St. 625, 36 Ohio Ops 252, 76 N.E.2d 875 (1947); Rainwater v. Hobeika, 208 S.C. 433, 38 S.E.2d 495 (1946); Greene v. Leeper, 193 Tenn. 153, 245 S.W.2d 181 (1951); Playmate Club, Inc. v. Country Clubs, Inc., 62 Tenn.App. 383, 462 S.W.2d 890 (1970); Diettrich v. J.J. Newberry Co., 172......
-
Joseph Martin, Jr., Delicatessen, Inc. v. Schumacher
...also, Aycock v. Vantage Mgt. Co., 554 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.Civ.App.); Bechmann v. Taylor, 80 Colo. 68, 249 P. 262) and in Greene v. Leeper, 193 Tenn. 153, 245 S.W.2d 181, 1951, a renewal clause providing for a rental to be agreed upon according to "business conditions" was deemed enforceable. Fu......
-
Slayter v. Pasley
...appraiser, why may it not hear evidence and decide the value when the appraisement fails from some other cause? * * *' Greene v. Leeper, 193 Tenn. 153, 245 S.W.2d 181, construed a lease renewal provision reading "at a rental to be agreed on according to business conditions at that time." It......
-
Aycock v. Vantage Management Co.
...Co-Build Cos., 354 F.Supp. 980, 982-85 (D.C.V.I.1973); Bechmann v. Taylor, 80 Colo. 68, 249 P. 262, 263 (1926); Greene v. Leeper, 193 Tenn. 153, 245 S.W.2d 181, 181-82 (1951). The lessor argues that the present provision is less definite than a provision for a "reasonable" rental because it......