Weber v. Van Blerck Motor Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Barton, J., presiding. Assumpsit by Joseph F. Weber against the Van Blerck Motor Company for use and occupation. Judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court. Defendant brings error. The plaintiff was the owner of certain property situated on the Detroit river,, in the city of .Detroit, and on this land was a machine shop and a few outbuildings.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne; Barton, J., presiding. Assumpsit by Joseph F. Weber against the Van Blerck Motor Company for use and occupation. Judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court. Defendant brings error. The plaintiff was the owner of certain property situated on the Detroit river,, in the city of .Detroit, and on this land was a machine shop and a few outbuildings. Prior to the 15th of January, 1910, -'Joseph Van Blerck had leased the property under an oral agreement with the plaintiff. On January 15, 1910, a written lease was entered into by Mr. Van Blerck with Mr. Weber, renting…
1Opinion of the CourtKuhn, J.
(after stating the facts). It is the claim of the defendant that there was no assignment of the lease, and that, according to the understanding between the defendant company and Mr. Van Blerck, they were simply to occupy the premises from month to month until such time as better quarters were found. There is no question with reference to the rule of law that, where an assignment is absolute and for the entire term, the assignee succeeds to all the rights and liabilities of the original lessee (Damnstaetter v. Hoffman, 120 Mich. 48 [78 N. W. 1014], and authorities therein cited); and, further,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Darmstaetter v. HoffmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by1 opinion
- Steinberg v. FineMichigan Supreme Court · 1923