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/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (95)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
- Kintner v. Harr, 408 P.2d 487 (1965)
Full Text
602 charsWe now direct ourselves to the final question raised by this appeal, whether the defendants were constructively evicted from the premises by the failure of the plaintiffs to correct the defects as found by the officials of the City of Missoula. It is claimed by Mr. Harr that he was constructively evicted because the plaintiffs would not agree to do the work necessary to comply with a directive of the State Board of Health. Mr. Eiggs points out, and rightly so, that if Harr, as his assignee, was constructively evicted, thereby terminating the obligations due under the lease, he also was relieved.