Spoor-Lasher Co. v. Newburgh Gas & Oil Co.

• Decision Date: 08 January 1936
• Citation: 199 N.E. 656,269 N.Y. 447
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: SPOOR-LASHER CO., Inc., v. NEWBURGH GAS & OIL CO. et al.

269 N.Y. 447

199 N.E. 656

SPOOR-LASHER CO., Inc.,

v.NEWBURGH GAS & OIL CO. et al.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Jan. 8, 1936.

Action by the Spoor-Lasher Company, Incorporated, against the Newburgh Gas & Oil Company and another. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (245 App.Div. 329,280 N.Y.S. 587), affirming a judgment of the Trial Term (245 App.Div. 329, 330 note, 280 N.Y.S. 585), plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second department.

Joseph A. McCabe, of Poughkeepsie, for appellant.

George V. L. Spratt, of Poughkeepsie, for respondents.

CRANE, Chief Judge.

The courts have been asked to decide who is obliged to pay the real estate taxes imposed on certain oil tanks erected on leased property.

On August 15, 1930, the Spoor-Lasher Company, Inc., leased by written instrument vacant land to the Newburgh Gas & Oil Company for the term of four years, giving to the lessee the ‘privilege of erecting on said leased premises any other building or structure of any kind or nature upon their obtaining from the party of the first part written permission to do so,’ etc., ‘and the said premises are to be used and occupied as a storage station for the bulk storage of gas and oil and kindred commodities.’ The following are also pertinent provisions:

‘8. That no building, structure or improvement of any kind or nature shall be made on the said premises without the consent of the said landlord in writing and all structures so placed upon the said premises with the consent of the said landlord other than movable tanks and personal equipment, shall belong to the said landlord at the expiration of the said lease term, or any extension thereof in the event that the option to renew this lease is exercised by lessee.’

‘21. If the landlord shall default in the payment of any taxes, assessed against the premises * * * the tenant may pay the same and the amount so paid * * * may be applied by the tenant upon any rent theretofore or thereafter falling due hereunder.’

Nowhere do we find any statement or provision as to the payment of taxes except the above. The lessor reasons that because of the words ‘taxes assessed against the premises' the taxes which it was to pay were restricted to those assessed against the premises-vacant premises-as they were on the date of the lease. This reasoning cannot hold good, as the expression looks to the future and the contract gave the lessee the right to erect buildings and structures on the land which become the property of the lessor. Movable tanks and personal equipment only were to remain the property of the lessee.

Here we have a case where land is leased with...