Centerline Investment Co. v. Tri-Cor Industries, Inc., 80 S.W.3d 499 (2002)

Citation: Centerline Investment Co. v. Tri-Cor Industries, Inc., 80 S.W.3d 499 (2002)
Parent Document: Centerline Investment Co. v. Tri-Cor Industries, Inc., 80 S.W.3d 499 (2002)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 2002-07-23
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5274892/centerline-investment-co-v-tri-... ↗

Full Text

1,010 chars

We recognize that the landlord’s efforts to mitigate in this case appear to have benefited Tri-Cor. We also acknowledge that there are occasions where it will be economically efficient to give landlords *504the freedom to creatively mitigate a defaulting tenant’s damages. But we are persuaded that the better rule is to obtain the defaulting tenant’s consent before holding it responsible for rent on space it never contracted to lease. Here, the landlord did not even inform the defaulting tenant that it was intending to hold it liable on the rent from the space vacated by Alcide until almost six months after Alcide had moved into Tri-Cor’s space. Tri-Cor therefore had no opportunity to arrange for a tenant to occupy the space left open by Alcide’s move. Under these circumstances, we find it was error for the court to award Centerline damages based upon the rent that Alcide would have paid if it had not moved into Tri-Cor’s space. The damages awarded Centerline must therefore be reduced by $16,731.

Other Sections in This Document (31)

Full Text