Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)

Citation: Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
Parent Document: Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
Jurisdiction: Montana (state)
Effective Date: 1965-12-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1421283/kintner-v-harr/ ↗

Full Text

1,199 chars

Ordinarily an assignment of a lease does not release the lessee from his obligations even though the lessor consents to the assignment. Nor does the express assumption by the assignee of obligations under the lease affect the liability of the lessee to the lessor. Peiser v. Mettler, 50 Cal.2d 549, 328 P.2d 953, 74 A.L.R.2d 1; Flynn v. Mikelian, 208 Cal.App.2d 305, 25 Cal.Rptr. 138; Gerber v. Pecht, 15 N.J. 29, 104 A.2d 41. The rule is well-established that real covenants create in the covenantor a contractual duty which cannot be escaped simply by transferring the property to another. The question of continued liability of the covenantor after assignment turns upon the express or presumed intention of the parties to the contract. In the absence of an express provision, their intention should be determined from the language of the entire contract, giving due consideration to the surrounding circumstances. Pratt-Low Preserving Co. v. Evans, 55 Cal.App. 724, 204 P. 241; Proctor v. Union Coal Co., 243 Mass. 428, 137 N.E. 659; City of Glendale v. Barclay, 94 Ariz. 358, 385 P.2d 230; 2 Casner, American Law of Property, § 9.18; 4 Corbin Contracts, § 864; 21 C.J.S. Covenants § 86, p. 943.

Other Sections in This Document (95)

Full Text