Keroes v. Coleman

District of Columbia Court of Appeals November 2, 1914

Keroes v. Coleman, 42 App. D.C. 436 (D.C. 1914)

1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2308

Orsdbl

Opinion of the Court

Mr. Justice Van Orsdbl

delivered the opinion of the Court:

The covenant in the lease, though inartificially expressed, is not difficult to interpret. It reserved to defendant the right, in *438the event the property should be .sold to a purchaser other thau the plaintiff, to obtain possession thereof before the termination of the lease, upon giving plaintiff six months’ notice to quit and the payment of $2,000. But the tenancy of plaintiff was not interrupted. Defendant did not elect to exercise the right reserved to her in the lease. Hence, plaintiff was not damaged, and is not in position to enforce his claim for the amount of damages agreed upon in the event of his being called upon to deliver possession before the termination of the lease. The authorities cited in defendant’s brief support this interpretation. Foley v. Constantino, 43 Misc. 91, 86 N. Y. Supp. 780; Johnston v. King, 83 Wis. 8, 53 N. W. 28; McDaniel v. Callan, 75 Ala. 327; Lunke v. Egeland, 46 Mont. 403, 128 Pac. 610.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs. Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: KEROES v. COLEMAN
Status: Published
Syllabus: Landlord and Tenant; Lease; Notice to Quit; Stipulated Damages. No right to recover the stipulated sum, when the lessee is not asked to and does not yield possession during his term, is given him by a provision in the lease, reserving to the lessor, if the lessee does not wish to purchase the premises, the right to sell to a third person upon payment to the lessee of a stipulated sum, and adding that in such event the lessee is to have six months’ notice to quit.