Austin v. Harris
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of contract to recover the amount agreed to be paid for an assignment of a lease from Samuel Sheafe to the plaintiff. . Answer, that the plaintiff did not obtain his lessor’s assent in writing to the assignment, although the defendant requested him to do so, and offered to pay him said amount if he would. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
This is, we think, a plain case. The plaintiff, for the consideration which he seeks to recover in this action, was to assign to the defendants, on the 1st of February 1856, the lease of the store numbered 219 on Washington Street, and to give up and surrender to the defendants on that day “ all that part of the said building occupied by him the said Austin and demised to him by said lease, for the remainder of the term of said lease, to wit, until the first day of March 1856.” Here is clearly, if not more, an agreement to give to the defendants the legal possession of the store, and to…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Goldman v. Daniel Feder & Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1919
- American Community Stores Corp. v. NewmanNebraska Supreme Court · 1989