Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Citation
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Parent Document
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1998-08-25
Other Sections in This Document (22)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
- Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)
Full Text
1,151 charsThe intent expressed in the plain language of the lease between the plaintiff and the defendants created an option to renew the lease for an additional five year period under the same terms and conditions as the original lease, except that the amount of rent during the renewal period would be subject to a negotiated adjustment not to exceed 10 percent of the rent in effect during the last year of the lease. Further, the negotiated renewal lease was to be in writing, and if the defendants remained in the premises after the expiration of the term of the lease without having executed a new written lease, such holdover would not constitute a renewal or extension of the lease, but in fact create a month-to-month tenancy. Thus, to renew the lease effectively, the parties were required to negotiate the rental amount and create a new written document. In this case, that never happened. Although the defendants paid an increased amount of rent equal to the maximum amount permitted by the lease, the plaintiff refused to accept the extension, attempted to add additional terms and sent the defendants a different lease to which they did not agree.