Granger v. Board of Trustees of the Illinois & Michigan Canal
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action on a lease, made by the trustees of canal to Granger, in September, A. L>. 1845. The defendant below filed the general issue and a special plea, alleging that during the pendency of this action the trustees consented, that if Granger would withdraw his defense to an action of ejectment then pending against him on the part of the trustees, to reserve the same lots named in the lease, that Granger should be discharged from the rent, which was done, etc.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a lease, made by the trustees of canal to Granger, in September, A. L>. 1845. The defendant below filed the general issue and a special plea, alleging that during the pendency of this action the trustees consented, that if Granger would withdraw his defense to an action of ejectment then pending against him on the part of the trustees, to reserve the same lots named in the lease, that Granger should be discharged from the rent, which was done, etc. Upon this plea there was an answer and issue to the country. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the trustees, and…
1Opinion of the CourtScates, C. J.
Had the defendants power to lease any portion of the canal lands or lots in 1845 ? and if so, does the provision for double rent in 2d Section of Act in Relation to Landlord and Tenant (Rev. Stat. p. 333), apply to a holding over under such lease? We answer both propositions affirmatively.
The court do not advert to a want of such power in the former case between these parties (13 Ill. R. 740); and the question does not appear to have been raised in that case.
As the evidence is not preserved in the record, we must sustain this judgment, if in any case such a power might exist, though qualified…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Rexam Beverage Can Co. v. BolgerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Diederich v. RoseIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
- Diederich v. RoseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907