H.G. Hill Co. v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 04 June 1936
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 727
• Parties: H.G. HILL CO. v. TAYLOR.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

168 So. 693

232 Ala. 471

H.G. HILL CO. v. TAYLOR.

8 Div. 727

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 4, 1936

Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County; Paul Speake, Judge.

Action of unlawful detainer by Mrs. J.S. Taylor against the H.G Hill Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Taylor Richardson & Sparkman, of Huntsville, for appellant.

Watts &amp White, of Huntsville, for appellee.

KNIGHT Justice.

Unlawful detainer by landlord against tenant.

Mrs Taylor owned a certain storehouse and lot in the city of Huntsville, Ala., which she on the 23d day of July, 1925, rented to the appellant, and under this lease or rental contract the latter duly entered. It is undisputed in the evidence that Mrs. Taylor owned the property in question and that the appellant entered and took possession of the same as the tenant of Mrs. Taylor; and that the appellant paid the agreed monthly rent to its landlord for a number of years.

Upon the trial of the cause in the circuit court, to which court the case was appealed by appellant from the inferior court of Huntsville, the plaintiff offered in evidence the lease contract between the appellant and appellee. The appellant objected to the introduction of this contract in evidence upon the ground that there was a witness to plaintiff's signature, and that "the proof would have to be made by the witness," and upon the further ground that the instrument showed upon its face that it had been altered since its execution "by having a paper pasted on it and there was no explanation for that." And prior to its introduction, defendant also objected to the introduction of the lease because its execution by H.G. Hill Company was not shown.

We may at once dispose of the ground of the objection that the instrument had been altered since its execution by saying that the testimony showed that the contract had not been altered or changed in any respect after its execution, and that the paper pasted on the contract was placed there as a part of the instrument before its execution, and was a part of the instrument when signed and delivered.

Under the evidence in the cause there was no error committed in permitting the plaintiff to read in evidence either the original lease contract or the paper denominated "renewal lease."

The original lease has affixed thereto the corporate name of the lessee company, and its corporate seal. The "renewal lease" is also signed by the corporation in its corporate name, and has affixed to it its corporate seal. This renewal lease refers to the original lease and recites that such original lease was in fact executed by the appellant and appellee, using the following language:

"Witnesseth: That on July 23, 1925, a lease was entered into between the First Party and Second Party, for the renting of the store building, together with rooms and adjoining, located on the corner of Meridian and Walker Street, being known as No. 201 Huntsville, Alabama, and as the J.S. Taylor building.

"The said lease is recorded in Volume 199, page 150, of the Probate's Office, Madison County, Alabama, to which reference for particulars is here made."

To be noted, also, is the fact that this renewal shows the terms of the original lease, particularly as to the commencement and ending of the original lease. This last lease is signed in the corporate name of appellant by ...