O'Connor v. Daily
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, by the assignee of a lease, against the lessor, for breach of its covenants. Trial in the superior court, before Rockwell, J., who before verdict, by consent of parties, reported the question, whether the plaintiff could maintain his action, for the determination of this court, as follows : James Sturgis and William Dehon leased to the defendant certain land in Boston for five years from April 1, 1866, by an indenture containing this provision: “ In case the…
Read the full summary
Contract, by the assignee of a lease, against the lessor, for breach of its covenants. Trial in the superior court, before Rockwell, J., who before verdict, by consent of parties, reported the question, whether the plaintiff could maintain his action, for the determination of this court, as follows : James Sturgis and William Dehon leased to the defendant certain land in Boston for five years from April 1, 1866, by an indenture containing this provision: “ In case the lessors shall sell the said land before the expiration of this lease, they may terminate the same by giving the lessee ninety…
1Opinion of the Court
Morton, J..The lease from the defendant to Moley and McShane, on which the plaintiff sues as assignee, contains no express covenant for quiet enjoyment. The plaintiff’s claim is that, by force of the words “ lease, demise and let,” there is an implied covenant for quiet enjoyment, which has been broken by his eviction by the purchaser of the premises. If it be true that these words, uncontrolled and unqualified by any other provisions in the lease, would import such a covenant, they cannot do so when the lease contains other stipulations which show a different intent of the parties.
In the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Duncklee v. WebberMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Gunsenhiser v. BinderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Shaw v. AppletonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894