Gulesian v. St. James Amusement Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, begun by a writ in trustee process dated July 9,1918, for specific performance of certain covenants in a sublease by the plaintiff to the defendant, described in the opinion, and for damages. The suit was referred to and heard by two successive masters, in circumstances described, in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, begun by a writ in trustee process dated July 9,1918, for specific performance of certain covenants in a sublease by the plaintiff to the defendant, described in the opinion, and for damages. The suit was referred to and heard by two successive masters, in circumstances described, in the opinion. It was alleged in the bill, admitted in the answer and found by the second master that the plaintiff, in his lease from the owners of the property, covenanted in substance that he would entirely equip the theatre, including therein all carpets, asbestos fire curtain, draperies,…
1Opinion of the CourtJenney, J.
The plaintiff is lessee for twenty-one years from *176March 31, 1911, of certain, premises in Boston which include the building known as the St. James Theatre. The defendant was the assignee of a sublease of said theatre dated January 28, 1913, from the plaintiff to the Lorraine Amusement Company, and was in occupation of the premises on July 9, 1918, when this suit was brought. The sublease expired on August 31, 1918. No question is made as to the plaintiff’s right to relief in equity. The sublease contained the following covenants on the part of the lessee:
“That it will at all times keep all…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Kimberly v. ArmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Bon v. GravesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Appleton v. . MarxNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- New York Bank Note Co. v. Kidder Press Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Bradley v. BordenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Corbett v. Derman Shoe Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
- Schimmelfennig v. Grove Farm Co., Ltd.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1955