Dodd

Appeal from judgment and order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the possession of certain premises rented of plaintiff by defendants. The complaint was framed upon the theory that the defendants were tenants from month to month and were holding over after one month’s notice terminating their tenancy. Defendants pleaded that they leased the premises for one year ending October 1, 1906, and at the trial introduced in evidence in support thereof a writing signed and delivered to defendants by plaintiff in the words following, to wit:

Defendants went into possession October 1, 1905, and paid all rent up to March 1, 1906, at which time they tendered the rent for March, which was refused by plaintiff, he having on February 28th given defendants a notice to surrender possession March 1, 1906.

The trial court, over the objection and exception of defendants, permitted the plaintiff to give testimony of an oral agreement to the effect that he leased the premises sued for, known as the old Sehien store, to defendants from month to month, although he admitted that he executed and delivered to defendants the writing above set forth, and…