Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Fritz v. Warthen, 213 N.W.2d 339 (1973)

Citation
Fritz v. Warthen, 213 N.W.2d 339 (1973)
Parent Document
Fritz v. Warthen, 213 N.W.2d 339 (1973)
Jurisdiction
Minnesota (state)
Effective Date
1973-11-30

Other Sections in This Document (52)

Full Text

822 chars
According to traditional common-law principles, a tenant’s covenant to pay rent is independent of a landlord’s covenant to repair and maintain the premises. Therefore a landlord’s breach of his covenants does not relieve a tenant of his obligations under the léase. The payment of rent is a prerequisite to continuing in possession regardless of the failure of the landlord to fulfill his obligations to repair and maintain the premises. See, Strupp v. Canniff, 276 Minn. 558, 150 N. W. 2d 574 (1967); Leifman v. Percansky, 186 Minn. 427, 243 N. W. 446 (1932); Roach v. Peterson, 47 Minn. 462, 50 N. W. 601 (1891); 49 Am. Jur. 2d, Landlord & Tenant, § 613. The only covenant which is dependent upon the payment of rent is the delivery of possession to the tenant. See, Cohen v. Conrad, 110 Minn. 207, 124 N. W. 992 (1910).