Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kulawitz v. Pacific Woodenware & Paper Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1944No. S. F. 16882Published

1ConcurrenceCarter, J.

I concur in the judgment of affirmance, however, I believe that our decision should properly be based upon the doctrine of surrender or surrender by operation of law as that term is used in the law of landlord and tenant. A surrender is the yielding up of an estate for years to the landlord. (Triest & Co. v. Goldstone, 173 Cal. 240 [159 P. 715]; Welcome v. Hess, 90 Cal. 507 [27 P. 369, 25 Am.St.Rep. 145].) It may arise by express agreement between the landlord and tenant or by operation of law. (Steel v. Thompson, 59 Cal.App. 191 [210 P. 430] ; Bauer’s Law etc. Co. v. Third St. I. Co., 21…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Medico-Dental Building Co. v. Horton & ConverseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Welcome v. HessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Bonetti v. TreatCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Phillips-Hollman, Inc. v. Peerless Stages, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Gaskill v. TrainerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853

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

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

Powered by the Exa API