Superior Court of Delaware, 1844

Redden v. Barker

Redden v. Barker
Superior Court of Delaware · Decided July 5, 1844 · Booth
4 Del. 179

Counsel

Houston and Wootten, for plaintiff., Cullen, for defendant., Cullen, for defendant., Houston, in reply,

Redden v. Barker

Opinion of the Court

Booth, Chief Justice,

charged the jury.—The action is to recover a compensation for the use and occupation of a house and lot. It proceeds on the idea of a contract of renting, either express or implied. A contract for the payment -of rent may be implied from circumstances. The relation of landlord and tenant must exist. If the defendant enter under an agreement to purchase, he is not Háble for rent; for the character of purchaser excludes that of tenant; except perhaps, in a case similar to the present, where the defendant enters under a conditional contract for the purchase, and there is an express agreement to pay rent in case such purchase should not be carried out; the defendant might be liable on proof of such express agreement. If the jury think this is such a case, and the agreement is sufficiently proved, the plaintiff ought to have a verdict; otherwise, not.

Verdict for defendant

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.