Gray v. Gaff, 8 Mo. App. 329 (1880)

Citation: Gray v. Gaff, 8 Mo. App. 329 (1880)
Parent Document: Gray v. Gaff, 8 Mo. App. 329 (1880)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 1880-02-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6732597/gray-v-gaff/ ↗

Full Text

612 chars

In an action for use and occupation, the English courts go far in protecting the tenant from annoyances of all sorts, and hold that if the landlord, by his misconduct, render the occupation of the tenant so uncomfortable that he is virtually driven out, the landlord cannot recover for use and occupation after the tenant has quit. Kirkman v. Jervis, 7 Dowl. P. C. 678. But, as Judge Bronson remarks in Gilhooley v. Washington, 4 N. Y. 217, an action for the non-payment of rent does not depend on the act of occupation or enjoyment, as the equitable action does; and the principle of these cases does not apply.

Other Sections in This Document (22)

Full Text