Legal Opinion

Childress v. Bowser

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 7, 1989No. 41S01-8912-CV-00902PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHEPARD, Chief Justice.

The question presented is whether a binding covenant to repair may reasonably be inferred from a landlord’s admonition to a tenant at the inception of an oral lease to “do nothing” to the rental premises and his later specific promise to make a particular repair. We hold that such an inference may reasonably be drawn.

Richard Childress (Richard) leased a house from Carl E. Bowser, Jr., in March 1985 under an oral, month-to-month lease. At the inception of the lease Bowser told Richard, “don’t change nothing, don’t nail a lot of nails in, don’t do nothing to the house.”…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Purcell v. EnglishIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Tippecanoe Loan & Trust Co. v. JesterIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
  3. COLEMAN ET UX. v. DeMossIndiana Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. Rossow v. JonesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  5. LaPlante v. LaZearIndiana Court of Appeals · 1903

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Scandia Associates, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Dickison v. HargittIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Houston v. BooherIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. Johnson v. Scandia Associates, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API