Reithman v. Brandenburg

The tenancy averred and proven by plaintiff

in the court below was for a single month; it was not a tenancy “from month to month,” within the meaning of section 1493 of the General Statutes. The provisions, therefore, of this section regarding a change in the terms of lease, have no application to the contract now under consideration. Stopplekamp v. Mangeot, 42 Cal. 316.

If plaintiff’s action had been brought under this provision it could not be maintained; for the notice served upon defendant was not a proper compliance therewith. It is not, and was not intended to be, a “notice to quit,”…