Briggs v. Chase, 105 Me. 317 (1909)

Citation: Briggs v. Chase, 105 Me. 317 (1909)
Parent Document: Briggs v. Chase, 105 Me. 317 (1909)
Jurisdiction: Maine (state)
Effective Date: 1909-04-06
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5118602/briggs-v-chase/ ↗

Full Text

855 chars

While the phraseology of the contract found in Holley v. Young, supra, "We further agree to lease,” standing by itself might well be said to be a contract for a lease, yet the court construed it as follows: "The question whether a written instrument is a lease or only agreement for a lease, depends ... on the intention of the party to be collected from the whole instrument . . , The form of expression ‘ we agree to rent or lease ’ is far from being decisive on this question, and does not necessarily import that a lease is to be given at a future date. On the contrary, these words may take effect as a present demise, and the words, ‘ agree to let ’ have been held to mean exactly the same thing as the word ‘let, ’ unless there be something in the instrument to show that the present demise could not have been in the contemplation of the parties.”

Other Sections in This Document (19)

Full Text