Boucher v. St. George
Montana Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceJustice Matthews
I am of the opinion that our law might well be amended to conform to the idea expressed by my learned associate, Mr. Justice Galen, in his dissenting opinion, but I am convinced that Mr. Justice Angstman’s opinion correctly construes our statutes as adopted from California after being interpreted in that state.
Under the authorities, generally, the controlling question in determining whether or not a letting is “at will,” is, “Does the contract fix a definite period or term?” “A letting for an indefinite period, by the month” is at will (Sanford v. Johnson, 24 Minn. 172) and all leasing for an…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Radican v. HughesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1913
- Byrne v. BeardenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
- Haines v. BeachMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Sanford v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
- Carhart v. White Mantel & Tile Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1909
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.