Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Citation
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Parent Document
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1996-01-23
Other Sections in This Document (33)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
- Siragusa v. Chang Su Park, 913 S.W.2d 915 (1996)
Full Text
358 chars784 S.W.2d at 242. Park was no longer entitled to any of the benefits of the lease, but he was still obligated under his express covenant for payment of the rent. As such, the trial court did not err in entering judgment against Park for the amount of the unpaid rent due under the terms of the lease. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. All concur.