Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Future Interests - Rule Against Perpetuities - Legislation Exempting Options To Purchase In Leases, Edward A. Manuel S.Ed.
Future Interests - Rule Against Perpetuities - Legislation Exempting Options To Purchase In Leases, Edward A. Manuel S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
A recent West Virginia statute provides that in all leases subsequently executed, an option to purchase the whole or any part of the leased premises-exercisable during or at the end of the term is not subject to the rule against perpetuities. The statute also provides that the rule against perpetuities shall not constitute a defense to a suit to enforce such an option against the lessor. W. Va. Code (Michie, Cum. Supp. 1957) §3541(3).
Real Property - Landlord And Tenant - Lessor's Arbitrary Withholding Of Consent To Sublease, William G. Mateer S.Ed.
Real Property - Landlord And Tenant - Lessor's Arbitrary Withholding Of Consent To Sublease, William G. Mateer S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Defendant leased a portion of plaintiff's building for a seven-year period. Contained in the lease was a covenant whereby the lessee agreed not to assign or sublet without the lessor's consent. One year prior to the expiration date of the lease, the defendant gave notice of his intention to vacate and submitted to the plaintiff a proposed sublease under which the premises would be rented to the Postmaster General of the United States. The plaintiff stipulated that the proposed sublessee was ready, able, and willing to assume the obligations of the original lease and was a proper sublessee in every …
Real Property - Landlord And Tenant - Need For Lessee Who Transfers Whole Term To Base Right Of Re-Entry On Condition Of "Substantial Advantage" To Him, John A. Beach S.Ed.
Real Property - Landlord And Tenant - Need For Lessee Who Transfers Whole Term To Base Right Of Re-Entry On Condition Of "Substantial Advantage" To Him, John A. Beach S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff lessee transferred his interest in the first floor and basement of certain commercial premises for the full remaining period of his own lease, retaining his interest in the second floor, where he lived. This transfer was in form a sublease, under which plaintiff as sublessor reserved power to cancel the sublease and take possession without notice if the premises were used for any purpose other than an off-sale liquor store. Plaintiff's transferee later assigned all his interest to defendant corporation, which immediately began converting the premises into an ice cream store. After defendant had spent over $10,000 in remodeling, …