Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Sun Drug Co. v. West Penn Realty Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 13, 1970No. Appeals, Nos. 4 to 9, inclusive, 22, 23 and 24Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Cohen:

In this case we are called upon to construe three restrictive covenants—one in each of three leases—by which plaintiff, Sun Drug Company, Inc. (Sun) rented storerooms in various shopping centers near Pittsburgh. By a written lease of October 27, 1961, Sun rented a storeroom in the Eastland Shopping Center. Paragraph 8 of the lease provides in part: “During the term of this Lease, or any renewal or extension hereof, Landlord will not let or permit any Storeroom in the Shopping Center, or any other land controlled by landlord, either…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Jones v. Park Lane for Convalescents, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. Baederwood, Inc. v. MoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  5. Heidt v. Aughenbaugh Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API