Budaeff

Budaeff v. Huber

Good Law
14 Cal. Rptr. 729·194 Cal. App. 2d 12·1961 Cal. App. LEXIS 1784
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 20, 1961Civ. 19359California3,898 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duniway, J.

Respondents, plaintiffs below, obtained a judgment in an action in ejectment, and defendants appeal. Respondents were landlords and appellants were tenants under a written lease. The action was for possession and past due rents, and the judgment substantially follows the prayer of the complaint. It is claimed that the judgment must be reversed for the following reasons: (1) The evidence does not support the findings as to a demand for the rent; (2) the evidence does not support the finding that respondents did not waive their right to terminate the lease; (3) the court erroneously failed to make findings as to respondents’ bad faith; (4) the court should have held that the complaint did not state a cause of action; (5) the court erred in excluding certain evidence. We conclude that the judgment should be affirmed.

The lease is dated July 24, 1954, and is for a term of five years, with an option, “at the expiration of the five years of this Lease” to renew for an additional five years. So far as appears, no attempt was made to exercise the option. Judgment was entered July 30, six days after the original term expired. The rent is $225 per month, payable monthly in advance on the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.