Graham v. City of Carondelet
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Land Court. This action, in the nature of a bill in equity, was brought by the plaintiff to be relieved against an alleged forfeiture by the defendant of a lease for ninety-nine years of lots number 29 and part of 27, in survey number one, of the commons of Carondelet, on two grounds. I. On the ground of accident and mistake, mutual to both parties.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Land Court. This action, in the nature of a bill in equity, was brought by the plaintiff to be relieved against an alleged forfeiture by the defendant of a lease for ninety-nine years of lots number 29 and part of 27, in survey number one, of the commons of Carondelet, on two grounds. I. On the ground of accident and mistake, mutual to both parties. The lot originally belonged to Bryan Mullanpliy, and after his death the executors of the estate instructed their agents to pay the rents due by the estate upon all the property owned by the estate leased from Carondelet, there…
1Opinion of the CourtBates, Judge
There are two points in this case. First, was the forfeiture legally made ? and second, do the circumstances show a ground of equity for setting it aside ?
As to the first point: The leases by the board of trustees of the Town of Carondelet to Bryan Mullanphy provided as follows : “And it is further covenanted and agreed by and between the parties aforesaid, that if at any time the rent aforesaid for six whole months shall be in arrear and unpaid, the said par*268ties of the first part, or their successors iu office, may terminate this lease by order or resolution, to be entered on record among…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Sheehan v. OwenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Moon v. SmithSupreme Court of Florida · 1939
- Lewis v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Locke v. BurnsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1977
- State ex rel. City of Centralia v. WilderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.