Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Sprincin King Street Partners v. Sound Conditioning Club, Inc., 925 P.2d 217 (1996)

Citation
Sprincin King Street Partners v. Sound Conditioning Club, Inc., 925 P.2d 217 (1996)
Parent Document
Sprincin King Street Partners v. Sound Conditioning Club, Inc., 925 P.2d 217 (1996)
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Effective Date
1996-10-28

Other Sections in This Document (75)

Full Text

642 chars
Two years and a month after signing the lease amendment/extension, Sound wrote Sprincin the first in a series of letters alleging that the "deplorable condition” of the common areas was impacting business. In four letters during 1994, Sound alleged that Sprincin made and broke several promises to redecorate and recarpet. It emphasized that it could not compete against fitness clubs who made a better "first impression.” And it offered to do the work itself, and deduct the expense over time from its rent obligation. Evidently, Sound did not pay rent for August or September 1994. Again, Sound refused to pay rent for May or June 1995. *60