Shephard v. Lerner
Court | California Court of Appeals |
Writing for the Court | GOOD; KAUFMAN, P. J., and DRAPER |
Citation | 6 Cal.Rptr. 433,182 Cal.App.2d 746 |
Parties | Robert C. SHEPHARD and Grace Shephard, his wife; Vincent Kircher; and George Pennebaker, Plaintiffs, Cross-Defendants and Respondents, v. Grace LERNER, Ingas A. Corbran and Dorothy Corbran, Defendants, Cross-Complainants, Cross-Defendants, Appellants and Respondents. Civ. 18834. |
Decision Date | 18 July 1960 |
Page 433
v.
Grace LERNER, Ingas A. Corbran and Dorothy Corbran, Defendants, Cross-Complainants, Cross-Defendants, Appellants and Respondents.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 17, 1960.
Hearing Denied Sept. 7, 1960.
[182 Cal.App.2d 747] Alfred M. Miller, San Francisco, for appellant Grace Lerner.
Joseph A. Brown, San Francisco, for respondents.
[182 Cal.App.2d 748] GOOD, Justice pro tem.
Appellant Lerner, owner and lessor of premises known as the Evans Hotel, situate on Broadway at Front Streets in San Francisco, appeals from a judgment in favor of respondents that declared a lease dated April 6, 1951 void and determined that no enforceable rights or duties subsisted thereunder. Respondents Shephard were
Page 434
the lessees and Kircher and Pennebaker were guarantors of performance of lessees' obligations under the lease. For some five years prior to the date of the lease Kircher and Pennebaker had operated the premises as a hotel and apartment hosue under a pre-existing lease executed in 1946. The evidence shows that the structure was built originally as a hotel with store rentals on the ground floor. In 1941 it had fallen into disuse for hotel purposes and was in a state of general delapidation. Thereafter many of the large exterior rooms were divided by the erection of single panel tongue and groove partitions and apartments were formed by combining two to five rooms. There were originally some 240 rooms of which 147 had been combined to make 55 apartment rentals. Gas ranges without vents and some sinks were installed therein, though in some apartments there was no water and others used existing basins as sinks. There were four toilets on each floor, three allocated to men and one to women. In 1946 Kircher and Pennebaker leased the premises and commenced a program of cleaning and largely decorative rehabilitation of unused hotel rooms and the use of the structure for hotel and apartment rentals was continued by them until they assigned their lease to the Shephards, at or about which time the new lease was executed for which they became guarantors. No structural changes appear to have been made during the Kircher and Pennebaker occupancy. At the time of the execution of the new lease the Shephards demanded an addenda thereto that was prepared by appellant's counsel and recited that the use of gas stoves then in the premises should not be deemed a violation of the lease and that the Shephards were authorized 'to use the said premises in substantially the...To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Satterfield, Cr. 6143
...on oil of the facts known to him at that moment, to arret appellant inside the house. (People v. Shelton (1964) 60 Cal.2d 740, 744, 6 Cal.Rptr. 433, 388 P.2d 665.) The admissibility of the evidence seized in the house later, after the officers reentered, turns upon the same question. The se......
-
King v. Moorehead, 25812
...were enacted . . . (and which) do indeed 'imply a prohibition' as to render the prohibited act void. See, also, Shephard v. Lerner, 182 Cal.App.2d 746, 6 Cal.Rptr. 433 (1960); Longenecker v. Hardin, supra, 264 N.E.2d l.c. 880(6). While the holding in Brown spoke in terms of the landlord's k......
-
Green v. Superior Court, S.F. 22993
...case to pass on the question of whether a lease of such premises constitutes an 'illegal contract' (see Shephard v. Lerner (1960) 182 Cal.App.2d 746, 6 Cal.Rptr. 433; Brown v. Southall Realty Co. (D.C.Mun.App. (1968) 237 A.2d 834) or, conversely, whether the tenant should be considered to h......
-
Glyco v. Schultz, 3851
...and void and confers no rights upon the wrongdoer. See Brown v. Southall Realty Co., 237 A.2d 834 (D.C.App., 1968); Shephard v. Lerner, 182 Cal.App.2d 746, 6 Cal.Rptr. 433 Ordinarily, in illegal contract cases, both parties are considered to be equally at fault, or in pari delicto, and will......