Linton v. Hart
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of covenant on a lease, brought by John Linton, the plaintiff below and plaintiff in error, to recover from Joseph Hart, the defendant, the sum of $118.75, one quarter’s rent due on the 14th September, 1854. The defendant pleaded entry and eviction by the plaintiff, and the rent estopped, upon which issue was joined. And on the trial of the case, the following facts appeared in evidence.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of covenant on a lease, brought by John Linton, the plaintiff below and plaintiff in error, to recover from Joseph Hart, the defendant, the sum of $118.75, one quarter’s rent due on the 14th September, 1854. The defendant pleaded entry and eviction by the plaintiff, and the rent estopped, upon which issue was joined. And on the trial of the case, the following facts appeared in evidence. On the 13th day of June, 1853, the plaintiff leased to the defendant a ferry on the Allegheny river, called “the Sharpsburg Ferry,” together…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Lewis, C. J.
The law will not apportion rent in favour of a wrongdoer, and therefore if the landlord wrongfully dispossesses his tenant of any portion of the demised premises, the -rent is suspended for the whole. But the owner of a reversion has a right to sell the whole or any part of it. Such right is incident to the right of property, and necessary to the full enjoyment of it. The exercise of it is not wrongful, and therefore, in the case of a sale of a part of the reversion, the law will apportion the rent; and the right of apportionment attaches…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Giraud v. MilovichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Swint v. McCalmont Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Doyle v. LongstrethSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898