Kaufman v. Williams
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from the Essex Circuit Court. Charles J. Basch, as landlord, and Benjamin H. Kaufman, as tenant, entered into a lease of property owned by Basch, which recited that the tenant had deposited with the landlord upon delivery of the lease $5,000 as security for the performance of all its covenants and conditions.
Read the full summary
On appeal from the Essex Circuit Court. Charles J. Basch, as landlord, and Benjamin H. Kaufman, as tenant, entered into a lease of property owned by Basch, which recited that the tenant had deposited with the landlord upon delivery of the lease $5,000 as security for the performance of all its covenants and conditions. It was thereby agreed that, if the tenant paid the rent and performed the conditions and covenants, the landlord would return the deposit to the tenant upon the termination of the lease, and that interest thereon should be paid semi-annually to the tenant. One provision of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Swayze, J.
The trial judge held that Williams and Mennen were liable as individuals by reason of the provisions of the lease. This could only be if the covenant to return the deposit was a covenant running with the reversion. On no other theory could Williams and Mennen be held liable on Baschs covenant. We think there was a misconception of the legal situation. The true state of the case is that $5,000 was pledged with the landlord as security for the rent. The covenant to repay the deposit did not change its character. It remained a deposit by way of…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Tuteur v. P. & F. Enterprises, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1970
- Walter H. Sullivan, Inc. v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Cummings v. Freehold Trust Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1937
- Four-G Corporation v. RutaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1957
- Partington v. MillerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.