Osborn

Osborn v. Henry Cowell Lime & Cement Co.

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 303·37 Cal. App. 67·173 P. 492
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 25, 1918Civ. No. 2365. Civ. No. 2366.California1,523 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Beasly, J.

The above-entitled cases are here upon the same transcript and were argued in the same briefs.

The case of Long et al. against the Cement Company will be considered first.

The defendant, Henry Cowell Lime and Cement Company, agreed to execute a lease to J. 0. Long and Herman Wobber of a certain piece of property situated between Sacramento, Market, East, and Commercial Streets, in the city of San Francisco, and the agreement to execute this lease contained the following provisions, namely: The company agreed to lease to Long and Wobber “that certain one story and basement reinforced concrete building to be erected on that certain lot owned by the Henry Cowell Lime and Cement Co., situated on Sacramento, Market, East and Commercial streets, with the exception of the space leased to J. Welsh as a saloon, as outlined in yellow on a certain blue-print floor plan revised July 7,1913, and marked ‘Exhibit A’ and attached hereto and made a part hereof. ’ ’ This agreement contained the following further provision: “Lessees to have the exclusive right to the roof for sign space, for which privilege they agree to keep the roof in good order and repair. ’ ’

These are the vital provisions…

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.