Mulcahy

Murphy-Cantrell Co., Inc. v. Mulcahy

Good Law
1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 533·72 Cal. App. 426·237 P. 557
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 25, 1925Docket No. 2869.California2,174 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

This controversy grows out of an agreement of lease between the defendant, as lessor, and George W. Breaw and C. P. Hamm, as lessees, whereby the former leased to the latter certain real property, situated in the city of Stockton, and described as the “south half of Lots One and Three, Block East of Center Street,” of said city. The lease was executed by the parties on the seventh day of January, 1918, and provided that its force should be operative for a term of five years, from January 7, 1918, the date of the execution of the agreement. At the time of the execution of the agreement of lease there was no building on the land, but the lease provided that the lessor should erect one thereon according to plans and specifications approved by both the lessor and lessees, the same to he occupied and used as a garage by the latter. The monthly rental to be paid was $160 for the first two years, $165 for the third year, $170 for the fourth, and $175 for the fifth year. Other provisions of the lease were: That the lessees should not assign the lease, nor let or underlet the premises, or allow any alterations therein, without the written consent of the lessor; that the lessees should (and…

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.