Barron v. Marsh
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpstt, for the use and occupation of a bowling-alley, part of the Fabyan House premises, in 1879, 1880, and 1881. The plaintiff, to show his title, introduced a lease of the Fabyan House premises from the Mt.
Read the full summary
Assumpstt, for the use and occupation of a bowling-alley, part of the Fabyan House premises, in 1879, 1880, and 1881. The plaintiff, to show his title, introduced a lease of the Fabyan House premises from the Mt. Washington Hotel Co. to himself and Oscar F. Barron, deceased, for five years, commencing April 1, 1879. The lease contained the following reservation: “Also reserving to Sylvester Marsh the premises leased to him by said hotel company, and all other buildings owned by said Marsh standing on said demised premises, with the right to remove the same, but not reserving to said Marsh any…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
The action for use and occupation is founded on privity of contract, not on privity of estate. It can only be maintained upon a contract, express or implied, to pay for the occupation. To sustain an action for use and occupation, the relation of landlord and tenant must exist either by express or implied agreement. It does not lie against one who has entered and occupied in defiance of the plaintiff. Wiggin v. Wiggin, 6 N. H. 298; Mussey v. Holt, 24 N. H. 248. The evidence that the bowling-alley was built by the defendant upon the hotel company’s land with the understanding that no rent was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Savings-Bank v. GetchellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
3Cited by2 opinions
- Keefe v. Sullivan County RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1916
- Swift & Co. v. New Durham Lumber Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1886