Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Citation
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Parent Document
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1998-12-08
Other Sections in This Document (28)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
- Gordon v. Williams, 986 S.W.2d 470 (1998)
Full Text
1,043 charsAppellants first allege that under Jones v. Gleason, 209 S.W.2d 536, 537 (Mo. App. E.D.1948), they were not in unlawful possession of the premises at the time the action was brought and, therefore, Respondents action in unlawful detainer must fail. Appellants admitted that neither April nor May rent was paid by the tenth of the month. The May rent was paid 25 days late. The lease provides that Appellants are in default for failing to pay by the tenth, and that Respondents may then “after ten (10) days written notice and after said ten days, terminate this lease and [Appellants] will forthwith quit and surrender the Leased Premises.” Appellants acknowledged receipt of Respondents’s intent to terminate the leasehold interest and demand for possession dated June 3, 1996. Appellants also admit receiving the July 1, 1996 demand for possession and notice of termination on July 2, 1996. Therefore, we find the Respondents terminated the lease, and Appellants were in wrongful possession at the time the action was brought on July 5,1996.