Legal Opinion

Rosenthal v. Prustman

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided October 31, 1921No. 8392Published

1Opinion of the Court

*847S. s. ROSENTHAL VS. <}. f. PRUTSMAN, Appellant.

No. 8392,

CHARLES F. CLAIBORNE, JUDGE.

This is a suit by a lessor against the lessee for can-callation of a lease for making another use of the property than that specified -oa- the lease.

Petitioner alleges that by an act under private signature he leased to the defendant Prutsman the upper duplex apartment No. 8838 St. Charles Avenue; that by said lease it was provided that «

"the premises herein leased are to be used for the following purposes, Dwelling x x x; Lessee is obligated to make no x xjx use of the leased premises for a purpose other,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Reiling v. RussellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
  2. Fidelity Etc. Co. v. West. Penn. Etc. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
  3. Sieward v. DenechaudSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1908
  4. Pierce v. HeddenSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1901
  5. Fengar v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API