Legal Opinion
Miller v. Reidy
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 4, 1927No. Docket No. 5580PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCraig, Acting P. J.
At all the times herein mentioned Dr. J. T. Miller and his wife, Huida S. Miller, have been the owners of real property situated at 1140 to 1142 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, and the business building thereon. They leased the premises to one Rutledge, doing business under the name of Rutledge Motor Company. By the provisions of the lease the latter’s tenancy began on the first day of February, 1920, and continued for a term of five years. It was stipulated in the lease:
“That the lessee shall not assign the lease nor sublet any or all of the demised premises without the written consent…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- German-American Sav. Bank v. GollmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Randol v. TatumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Alden v. MayfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Jones v. MariaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Easley Coal Co. v. Brush Creek Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Kern Sunset Oil Co. v. Good Roads Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
- Bedford Investment Co. v. FolbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Karbelnig v. BrothwellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Haack v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- Crowell v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.