Fraser v. Fraser, 598 A.2d 751 (1991)

Citation: Fraser v. Fraser, 598 A.2d 751 (1991)
Parent Document: Fraser v. Fraser, 598 A.2d 751 (1991)
Jurisdiction: Maine (state)
Effective Date: 1991-11-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5129878/fraser-v-fraser/ ↗

Full Text

953 chars

The written lease allows Karen Fraser to occupy the premises, but only if Estelle is residing there also. Nothing in the record suggests that the written lease was modified in any way to permit Duane to take Karen’s place or to become a tenant. Duane admits that he had no discussion with Barry and Phoebe about living on the property. He has never paid any rent. He was, at most, a tenant at will, and his tenancy could be terminated pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 6001 and 6002, with which Barry and Phoebe complied. Nor are Barry and Phoebe estopped from evicting Duane. The fact that they allowed him to live on the premises rent free for a number of years does not amount to misleading conduct, and there is no evidence that Duane was prejudiced by his reliance on their conduct. See Roberts v. Maine Bonding & Casualty Co., 404 A.2d 238, 241 (Me.1979). The entry is: Judgments affirmed. All concurring. . 14 M.R.S.A. § 6006 (1980) provides as follows:

Other Sections in This Document (18)

Full Text