Prendergast v. Searle
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover $400 rent. The case was tried before Holt, J., who found in favor of plaintiff in the amount demanded. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Appeal from an order denying a new trial.
The facts are short. The court below found that during the time stated in the complaint defendant was a tenant at will of plaintiff, paying rent at the rate of $50 per month. Such tenancy arose from the fact that defendant held over without any new contract or agreement, after the expiration of a prior written lease. Defendant vacated the leased premises June 28, 1897, and has never since occu*292pied the same. . On the theory and claim that the tenancy had never been terminated, and that defendant, though not in possession or occupancy of the premises,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Prendergast v. SearleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
3Cited by9 opinions
- Melady-Briggs Cattle Corp. v. Drovers State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Kinzel v. Boston & Duluth Farm Land Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- In Re West of St. Louis Trust Co. v. BrokawMissouri Court of Appeals · 1937
- White v. HewittSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Pennsylvania Rd. Co. v. L. Albert & Son, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.