Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Centennial Brewing Co. v. Rouleau, 49 Mont. 490 (1914)

Citation
Centennial Brewing Co. v. Rouleau, 49 Mont. 490 (1914)
Parent Document
Centennial Brewing Co. v. Rouleau, 49 Mont. 490 (1914)
Jurisdiction
Montana (state)
Effective Date
1914-10-19

Full Text

827 chars
Other considerations aside, upon the assumption that the [4] oral lease was wholly void, we think that in correct theory the defendants became Lavell’s tenants at will. (Tiffany on *504Landlord and Tenant, 106; Taylor’s Landlord and Tenant, sec. 59; Goodwin v. Clover, 91 Minn. 438, 103 Am. St. Rep. 517, 98 N. W. 322; Nickolls v. Barnes, 32 Neb. 195, 49 N. W. 342; McIntosh v. Hodges, 110 Mich. 319, 68 N. W. 158, 70 N. W. 550; Talamo v. Spitzmiller, 120 N. Y. 37, 17 Am. St. Rep. 607, 8 L. R. A. 221, 23 N. E. 980.) Upon this theory, the tenancy would have been terminated by the giving pf the notice prescribed in section 4502, supra; otherwise, by express provision of section 4503 the action could not be maintained. As Lavell’s successor, the plaintiff had no other or greater rights than he had. (Rev. Codes, see. 4521.)