Salley v. Michael
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. Y. Stevens, Chancellor; reversed and There is no provision in the lease for forfeiture, and the lessor is remitted to a suit for damages to the property.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. Y. Stevens, Chancellor; reversed and There is no provision in the lease for forfeiture, and the lessor is remitted to a suit for damages to the property. Should there be an implied covenant for rescission,still the landlord’s remedy would be a suit for damages, and not an action for rescission of the contract. 86 Nev. 382; 62 Nev. 143; 24 Cyc. 1348 (d); 41 Ark. 532; 71 Ark. 494. • A tenancy cannot be terminated for a breach of covenant by the lessee where there is no provision in the lease for a forfeiture or right of re-entry on.the occurrence of the…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This suit was brought by appellee Michael to cancel a lease of a certain lot in the city of El Dorado executed by Mm to appellants, L. L. and 0. T. Salley. The court granted the relief prayed, and this appeal is from that decree.
The lot leased is 75 by 75 feet, fronting on Washington Street, one of the principal streets of El Dorado. There was a 5-room brick building on the lot at the time the lease was made, 4 rooms of which were used as a residence and the 5th room was used as a store. The building is in the residential portion of the city, and is in the shape of an L. The lease was dated…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Little Rock Granite Co. v. ShallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- Millar v. MauneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Williams v. ShaverSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Buckner v. WarrenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
- Wales-Riggs Plantations v. BanksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Burton v. RiceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1961