Legal Opinion

Lloyd v. Worrell

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided September 15, 1869PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The defendant rented to the plaintiff the New York theatre for a specific term, and at a specified rent, the lease contained a covenant that at the expiration of such term there should be a renewal for such further time as should prove mutually profitable, the defendant to receive a share of the net profits in lieu of rent.

Read the full summary

The defendant rented to the plaintiff the New York theatre for a specific term, and at a specified rent, the lease contained a covenant that at the expiration of such term there should be a renewal for such further time as should prove mutually profitable, the defendant to receive a share of the net profits in lieu of rent. The specific term having expired, the defendant being unwiEing to continue the arrangement further, instituted proceedings before the city judge, to disposers the plaintiff, as a tenant whose term had expired. Thereupon, the plaintiff filed this bill in the nature…

1Opinion of the CourtBarrett, J.

The covenant to extend “ the time so long as it proves mutually profitable ” is indefinite as to the term, and uncertain as to the amount. The term “ mutually profitable ” does not contemplate the mere excess of receipts *76over expenditures, nor even a fair and ordinary profit, but the absolute satisfaction of both parties. The law can lay down no fixed rule upon the subject, for that only is mutu- ' ally profitable, which each party esteems to be sueh. What is profitable to one, may be unprofitable to another, and there is no happy medium in such matters, for the certain satisfaction of the…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Levy v. AmeliasNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Baurman v. BinzenNew York Supreme Court · 1891

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

Powered by the Exa API