Swartzbaugh v. Sampson case brief summary
54 P.2d 73 (1936)
CASE FACTS
The Defendant husband and plaintiff wife both owned property in joint tenancy with a right to survivorship.
Defendant husband and defendant lessee both negotiated and agreed to sublet a portion of the land for a boxing pavilion.
Throughout the negotiation, plaintiff made it known that she was opposed to the lease and remained uninvolved in the negotiation.
The Plaintiff did not sign the lease agreement.
Defendant husband maintained all of the income from the lease agreement.
Plaintiff brought suit to cancel the lease.
The lower court dismissed the action on the basis of nonsuit.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, the court had affirmed the judgment which held that where one tenant leases common property to a third party, the other tenants in common can not cancel the lease or recover exclusive possession of the entire property.
CONCLUSION
Where one tenant leases common property to a third party, the other tenants in common can not cancel the lease nor can they recover exclusive possession of the entire property.
The judgment was affirmed.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
54 P.2d 73 (1936)
CASE SYNOPSIS
The Plaintiff appealed the decision of the
Superior Court of Orange County (CA) which granted
defendant's motion for nonsuit in an action that involved the lease of
real property.CASE FACTS
The Defendant husband and plaintiff wife both owned property in joint tenancy with a right to survivorship.
Defendant husband and defendant lessee both negotiated and agreed to sublet a portion of the land for a boxing pavilion.
Throughout the negotiation, plaintiff made it known that she was opposed to the lease and remained uninvolved in the negotiation.
The Plaintiff did not sign the lease agreement.
Defendant husband maintained all of the income from the lease agreement.
Plaintiff brought suit to cancel the lease.
The lower court dismissed the action on the basis of nonsuit.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, the court had affirmed the judgment which held that where one tenant leases common property to a third party, the other tenants in common can not cancel the lease or recover exclusive possession of the entire property.
CONCLUSION
Where one tenant leases common property to a third party, the other tenants in common can not cancel the lease nor can they recover exclusive possession of the entire property.
The judgment was affirmed.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment