Legal Opinion

Conover v. Sterling Stores Co.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided May 2, 1923PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

It is admitted that the rent was paid in full to July 25, 1922. The receivers contend that nothing is due for rent since that date. They base their contention on the propo*28sition that they were entitled to elect, and did elect, to terminate the lease, thereby cancelling all claims for rent yet to accrue under it. The petitioners contend that if the right to terminate the lease be conceded, yet, under the Delaware statute (Rev. Code 1915, § 4595), the lessors are entitled to be paid a full year’s rent, and that the same is due them whether the rent be in arrear or growing due. In…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Quincy, Missouri & Pacific Railroad v. HumphreysSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Sunflower Oil Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. In re MitchellDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1902
  4. duPont v. Standard Arms Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1912
  5. In re Receivership Lord & Polk Chemical Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1895

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Nelson v. West Town State BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1940
  2. McSweeney Et Ux. v. DornSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
  3. In Re the Rehabilitation of National Heritage Life InsuranceCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1994
  4. Conner v. JordinSuperior Court of Delaware · 1935
  5. Di Angelo v. McCormick Bros.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API