§ 70-25-201

Citation: § 70-25-201
Parent Document: Solem v. Chilcote, 906 P.2d 209 (1995)
Jurisdiction: Montana (state)
Effective Date: 1995-11-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/883453/solem-v-chilcote/ ↗

Full Text

2,137 chars

at 549. There was substantial credible evidence to support the
District Court's finding. This evidence was not misapprehended.
Nor do we have any conviction that a mistake has been made. We
thus conclude that the District Court did not err in awarding to
the tenants the $10.00 withheld for the smoke detector.
Finally, the landlord withheld $126.67 as prorated rent. The
lease provided for 30-days notice to terminate the tenancy. The
tenants asked the landlord if they could leave early, and he
apparently agreed. The District Court went on to hold, however,
that this attempted oral modification of the lease agreement was
not effective. The court concluded that for an oral agreement to
be effective, it must be fully executed on both sides. The court
held that if the tenants had vacated the premises by April 1, which
was done, and the landlord prorated the rent to April 1, which was
not done, there would have been a full execution of the oral
agreement and the lease would be modified. The court held,

Other Sections in This Document (40)

Full Text