Earl Millikin, Inc. v. Allen

The principal issue on this appeal is whether, under the terms of the Hooker-Alien lease, Hooker would have been obliged to begin paying rent as of June 1, 1960, if water for human consumption was supplied by some other means than the well or the city water main.

There is no question that Millikin did not perform his construction contract on time, that time was of the essence under that contract, that Hooker delayed his occupancy for three months until September 1, 1960, and that Allen’s loss of rentals due to the delayed occupancy was $3,900. But the question is whether Allen could have…