Vailsburg Amusement Co., Inc. v. Criterion Inv. Co.
| Decision Date | 05 September 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 46.,46. |
| Citation | 156 A. 114 |
| Parties | VAILSBURG AMUSEMENT CO., Inc. v. CRITERION INV. CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Essex County.
Action by the Vailsburg Amusement Company, Inc., against the Criterion Investment Company, in which the defendant filed counterclaim. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued October term, 1930, before GUMMERE, C. J., and TRENCHARD and LLOYD, JJ.
Richard J. FitzMaurice, of Orange, for appellant.
Saul & Joseph E. Cohn, of Newark, for respondent.
The defendant is the owner of a building which contains a moving picture theater and two stores, located upon the corner of South Orange avenue and Telford street in the city of Newark. The plaintiff is the lessee of the building. One of the provisions of the lease required it to deposit with the owner of the property the sum of $12,000 as security for the faithful performance of the terms and conditions thereof; and that, upon the vacation of the premises by the lessee or upon its failure to perform any of the terms and conditions of the lease, the owner should have a right to retain such fund as liquidated damages. The lease was for a term of fifteen years commencing on March 15, 1921, the annual rental being $12,000 for the first ten years payable in equal monthly installments, plus the payment of the annual taxes assessed against the property. The plaintiff entered into possession under the lease, deposited with the defendant the $12,000 required by the provision referred to as security for the faithful performance of its terms and conditions; rented the two stores to subtenants, and itself operated the theater until some time in June, 1927. At that time Telford street was improved by the city of Newark, with the result that the level thereof was raised about a foot and a half higher than the level of the doors of the theater. Shortly after that, a license required to be obtained by the plaintiff as the operator of the theater from the municipal authorities of Newark expired, and it then applied for a renewal thereof. This application was denied upon the ground that since the raisirig of the grade of Telford street there was a lack of proper exits leading into it. Thereupon the plaintiff abandoned the further use of the theater, refused to pay installments of rent thereafter accruing, and demanded the return of the $12,000 deposit, although it continued to collect rents from the subtenants occupying the stores up to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re House of Gus Holder
...to the return of the deposit, less the amount of damages, if any, accrued upon termination of the lease. Vailsburg Amusement Co. v. Criterion Inv. Co., 156 A. 114, 115, 9 N.J. Misc. 951; See also Schmidig v. O'Baggy, 137 A. 560, 5 N.J. Misc. 554; Hecklau v. Hauser, 71 N.J.L. 478, 59 A. 18; ......
-
Thibault v. Frechette
...and see Stern v. Green, 127 Wash. 429, 435, 221 P. 601; Connolly v. Bachman, 209 Ill.App. 327, 328; Vailsburg Amusement Co. v. Criterion Investment Co., 156 A. 114, 9 N.J.Misc. 951, 954; Cummings v. Freehold Trust Co., 118 N.J.L. 193, 194, 191 A. 782. The court did not err in concluding tha......
-
BRADFORD HOTEL O. CO. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.
...1948, 135 Conn. 170, 175, 62 A.2d 863, 865. See also Connecticut Land & Mortgage Co. v. Lesser, supra; Vailsburg Amusement Co. v. Criterion Inv. Co., 1931, 156 A. 114, 9 N.J.Misc. 951; 1 Underhill, Landlord & Tenant § 370 Applying this principle to the case at hand, as did the Tax Court, it......
-
Chelsea Hotel Corp. v. Gelles
... ... Metropole Construction Co. v. Hartigan, 83 [N.J.L.] 409 [85 A. 313]; Pabst ... O'Neil v. Pearse, supra; Vailsburg Amusement Co. v. Criterion Investment Co. [156 A ... ...