Williams v. Martin

OPINION

By THE COURT:

The plaintiff having acquired title to the premises occupied •by the defendant served him with the legal notice to vacate before instituting this action in forcible entry and detainer, .and for rent.

No answer was filed by the defendant, and, so far as the record shows, he never asserted that he had a lease other than •one from month to month.

At the trial, the only issue that developed was as to the payment of rent for the month of December, 1947. As the notice to leave did not require the defendant to quit the premises till January 3rd, 1948, the payment or non-payment of…