Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Powell, 352 N.W.2d 532 (1984)

Citation: Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Powell, 352 N.W.2d 532 (1984) 2.
Parent Document: Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Powell, 352 N.W.2d 532 (1984)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 1984-08-07
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2170690/minneapolis-community-developme... ↗

Full Text

709 chars

2. The trial court ruled that the repayment schedule and the non-waiver provision of the lease are ambiguous when read together in that it is not clear whether the remedy for the tenant’s default under the repayment schedule is the acceleration of the entire amount, as provided in clause 6 of the repayment schedule, or the termination of the tenancy, as provided in clause 3 of the repayment schedule. The schedule states that MCDA may take a money judgment for the entire amount or may pursue an unlawful detainer action. The trial court did not elaborate on why giving the landlord its choice of remedies creates an “ambiguity,” nor did the respondent. The schedule itself makes it clear that the ten *535

Other Sections in This Document (29)

Full Text